From: noone Date: 2002-01-03T04:54:18+09:00 Subject: [ruby-talk:30074] Re: Ruby/Python: Software Engineering Dave/All: Excellent! Thanks! Embedded: On Thu, 3 Jan 2002, Dave Thomas wrote: > Quentin Crain writes: > > > Again, I believe Methodologies and Tools are linked and > > strongly. Certain tools are better for certain methodologies. Python > > attempted a few things (indention, docstrings, etc.). I am simply > > wondering if/where thought was put in on Ruby on this topic. > > I agree there is a linkage. For example, many of the XP practices are > as they are because of XP's origins in the Smalltalk community. I > suspect XP would be different (perhaps impossible :) if they'd all > been C++ programmers. > > However, I also don't think that details such as indentation and > docstrings are anything to do with methodologies. They are coding > standards. > > To return to the original question: If a team is about to start a > large Ruby project (large enough to require a Methodology) then they'd > be wise to choose or customize their methodology towards Ruby. Simply > applying the same methodology they used on a C++ project would not > work as effectively. This isn't Ruby-specific: teams should always > customize their methodologies to their environments, both before they > start and as they proceed. Sadly, few do. > I interpret you as saying: Methodologies are customized to one's tools. Is this fair? If so, when beginning a project do I "assemble my toolbox" and then ask "Ok, now, how do I go about building this thing using these tools?" Would it be better to think about how I want to build it and then look or even create the tools necessary to work that way? Would not this be the more productive way? How do improvements in processes occur when the focus is on the tools? Am I even making sense? > > Dave > thanks!! <