I think I'm in somewhat of a unique situation: I have a decent amount of coding experience in C/C++ in a Linux environment. However, I don't really have "project experience." For example, I'm familiar with the concept of version control, but I've never used any. Or, i've never worked on a project with more than a half dozen source files.
So, where I am now is that I'm working on this project with a large amount of code already existing. I have to write all my code in a windows environment using Visual Studio 2008 (Visual C++ to be specific) So I have a few questions:
How do integrate the already existing code into VC++? I'm using tortoise SVN and I have all the code on my machine...
Does anyone have any general advice on moving from small projects to larger projects?
Any help/advice would be greatly appreciated
Some of the keys to coming to grips with a large codebase:
Learn the ins and outs of source control. For now, start with just learning how all the SVN commands work. SVNBook is a good resource for this. Use VisualSVN or a similar plugin to interact with your repository within your IDE (Tortoise is still useful when you want to interact from elsewhere). Down the road, you'll want to become intimately familiar with branching and merging (and the tools for doing so quickly and correctly), and perhaps learn a DVCS (distributed version control system) like Git or Mercurial. This will at the very least expand your mind a bit, and likely teach you some lessons that will be useful even in projects where you use more traditional (centralized) version control.
Learn how to quickly look for things, find the declarations of unfamiliar classes and variables, and trace the execution of the larger application. There are lots of approaches for this, and you'll likely use most of them at one point or another, but some of them are your IDE's built-in features (most of them are quite robust in this regard, you should be able to right-click on a class name and find its declaration easily), grep and the like (ack is a variant that is very suitable for code spelunking), and CTAGS if you swing that (C/C++) way.
Learn the basics of unit testing, maybe even try out a framework like NUnit. Personally I'm not big into unit tests, but I recognize their utility and many swear by them, so don't knock it 'til you've tried it, at least.
Even if you're a flawless programmer with a robust battery of unit tests, large codebases demand a higher level of debugging skill, due to the inherent complexity of the problems that crop up. Whether it's learning how to write concise, descriptive debug printf()-like statements, becoming more familiar with your debugger, or even learning the ins and outs of your language (e.g. the corner cases of the type system/object model) can be helpful in unwinding these complex issues.
Unfortunately, I haven't used Visual Studio, but I think getting to know your IDE's project import/migration flow will be instructive too. Maybe somebody else will chime in with more concrete advice on that front. The process can be onerous, especially if you had a non-standard custom build system before and you want everything to be done The One True Visual Studio Way henceforth, but the tools for automatic dependence extraction from code are getting better and better.
The ideas already given are very good. But you also might want to read Mike Gunderloy's Coder to Developer. From your description of your current experience, I think you'll find it useful. Also read The Pragmatic Programmer; I keep it in my office by my desk, and often find myself loaning it to younger developers.
Just dive in. Hopefully whoever has been working on this project so far organized the code into logical groups (namespaces, class hierarchies, folders).
I'll also second Matt J on learning how to use the IDE: I'm not familiar with Visual Studio specifically, but there should be contextual menu items when you click on a class or method to take you to the place where it was declared, and from there to the classes it was derived from.
Get version control set up first though: you'll feel more comfortable poking around once you learn how to "revert" ;)
I have been using VisualSVN for quite a while without problems. It integrates perfectly with vs2008. As for moving on to large projects, a great way to see how things are done is to download the source of a decent size existing project and see how it was put together. After you've got a good idea of how things are structured, the best thing you can do for yourself is to write code. Brainstorm a project and go at it. Depending on how you feel about your outcome after completion, you could use it as part of your portfolio as well.
Unit tests. Use them or you'll regret it.
Get to know Visual Studio well, if you live in it, you really have to know it well.
AnkSVN is a free plug-in for Visual Studio 2008, and it works very well.
Also, Refactor for C++ is another free plug-in and one of the only ways to get refactoring support in Visual C++.
Also, you will soon learn that on large projects, 80% of your time is going to be spent doing code maintenance, so do yourself a favour and make your code a place in which you want to live, not a place of terror that you shrink back from. Clean code, the occasional comment, and unit tests will go a long way to making you want to get up and go to work in the morning, rather than dreading that you have to work on that monstrosity where anytime you touch anything it breaks.
Related
I just started working for a company that uses a "Rapid Development Environment" (RDE) supplied by a third party. The idea is that you can specify things like: "display data in grid", "datasource", "sort by" and it generates an a ASP.NET application that does all of those things.
I'm personally not a huge fan for the following reasons:
You are at the mercy of the RDE with
regards to what level of control you
have. For example there is no
try/catch/fail mechanism.
If there is a bug in the RDE there is
nothing you can do, you have to wait
for them to release a fix.
I'm not sure that it speeds things up
all that much.
There is no way you are going to find
someone with X years of experience
using some backwoods RDE. Every new
employee is starting from scratch
You can't integrate many common tools with it. Source control would be an example of this. While i'm sure I could take the EXTREAMLY verbose xml files used to generate the application and manually insert them into Source control there is no way for me to just right click and checkin. Even if I do that there would be nothing meaningful displayed if you do a diff...
Has anyone found these things useful? They seem like a gimic to keep costs down to me...
I don't use any tool/framework/environment/etc that I cannot bypass whenever I want to.
I don't care how good the product looks on paper or what impressing demos I'm shown.
If the product isn't mature and expressive enough to offer the possibility to work around it or hack/plug into it, I'll pass.
I have been struggling with an idea for a few weeks and wanted to see if someone can help me out here.
Programming today is full of abstractions, and people who do not understand the abstractions, do not truly understand the reason or design than went into building that abstraction/layer/framework and will struggle as soon as they step outside the comfort zone.
I was wondering if there is a learning resource that goes about teaching programming in an incremental fashion. This will lead to understanding the full stack.
take a small problem
implement a simple solution
talk about the the solution and the designs used
convert the solution into a framework or utility of some sort
now extend the problem space and repeat from step 2.
This way when someone then picks up any framework/library, they can easily visualize the problems the framework is trying to solve, the design decisions taken and the reasons thereof.
[Added to clarify the intent]
Based on the answers and comments below, I want to clarify that I want to move further up the stack. Building your own ORM to understand ORM better, same goes for ActiveRecord, IOC container, data binding, templating engine, and the host of other magic/glue/plumbing we use day-to-day.
Thanks.
Here's what I recommend : Have a brush with assembly (just one book or one month is enough). Have a good strong review of C++ (hopefully it will teach you some of C as well). Now the world is yours. Python is made in C/C++ , Object C is pretty close to c++, .NET is in C++ and C#/VB.NET , The windows API is oriented for C.
I picked C# as my abstract language of choice after this by the way.
Read the source. It is a good idea to build something you want to understand, but you can enhance your understanding of concepts significantly by looking at how something is built. This is especially true for infrastructure pieces (ORM/DI/Templating) which you seem to be interested in.
Get the software to build on your machine, attach a debugger and trace through the code. This is pretty easy for C#/Java with a good IDE. For dynamic languages like Python and Ruby, it takes a good editor and a lot of grepping.
If it is a good software package, it will usually have tests. Tests are a great place to start digging into code. They usually make clear the intent of the code, and also provide you a logical starting point to peel off the layers and actually peek under the hood.
Build a fully functional compiler from scratch in a systems language like C or C++. Maybe it isn't the full stack, but it's a large part of it. This is something I want to do as well. If only I could find the time and space.
The best example of the sort of learning resources I am seeking is the MIX session by Rob Eisenberg on "BUILD YOUR OWN MVVM FRAMEWORK". It goes step by step on explaining the pattern and also implementing it at the same time, attacking one problem area at a time.
http://live.visitmix.com/MIX10/Sessions/EX15
Hope there are more out there.
We're developing a web site. One of the development tools we're using has an alpha release available of its next version which includes a number of features which we really want to use (ie they'd save us from having to implement thousands of lines to do pretty much exactly the same thing anyway).
I've done some initial evaluations on it and I like what I see. The question is, should we start actually using it for real? ie beyond just evaluating it, actually using it for our development and relying on it?
As alpha software, it obviously isn't ready for release yet... but then nor is our own code. It is open source, and we have the skills needed to debug it, so we could in theory actually contribute bug fixes back.
But on the other hand, we don't know what the release schedule for it is (they haven't published one yet), and while I feel okay developing with it, I wouldn't be so sure about using it in production so if it isn't ready before we are then it may delay our own launch.
What do you think? Is it worth taking the risk? Do you have any experiences (good or bad) of similar situations?
[EDIT]
I've deliberately not specified the language we're using or the dev-tool in question in order to keep the scope of the question broad, as I feel it's a question that can apply to pretty much any dev environment.
[EDIT2]
Thank you to Marjan for the very helpful reply. I was hoping for more responses though, so I'm putting a bounty on this.
I've had experience contributing to an open source project once, like you said you hope to contribute. They ignored the patch for one year (they have customers to attend of course, although they don't sell the software but the support). After one year, they rejected the patch with no alternative solution to the problem, and without a sound foundation to do that. It was just out of their scope at that time, I guess.
In your situation I would try to solve one or two of their not-so-high priority, already reported bugs and see how responsive they are, and then decide. Because your success on deadlines will be compromised to theirs. If you have to maintain a copy of their artifacts, that's guaranteed pain.
In short: not only evaluate the product, evaluate the producers.
Regards.
My personal take on this: don't. If they don't come through for you in your time scale, you're stuck and will still have to put in the thousands of lines yourself and probably under a heavy time restriction.
Having said that, there is one way I see you could try and have your cake and eat it too.
If you see a way to abstract it out, that is to insulate your own code from the library's, for example using adapter or facade patterns, then go ahead and use the alpha for development. But determine beforehand what the latest date is according to your release schedule that you should start developing your own thousands of lines version behind the adapter/facade. If the alpha hasn't turned into an RC by then: grin and bear it and develop your own.
It depends.
For opensource environments it depends more on the quality of the release than the label (alpha/beta/stable) it has. I've worked with alpha code that is rock solid compared to alleged production code from another producer.
If you've got the source then you can fix the any bugs, whereas with closed source (usually commercially supported) you could never release production code built with a beta product because it's unsupported by the vendor who has the code, and so you can't fix it.
So in your position I'd be assessing the quality of the alpha version and then deciding if that could go into production.
Of course all of the above doesn't apply to anything even remotely safety critical.
It is just a question of managing risks. In open source, alpha release can mean a lot of different things. You need to be prepared to:
handle API changes;
provide bug fixes and workarounds;
test stability, performance and scalability yourself;
track changes much more closely, and decide whether to adopt then yet;
track the progress they are making and their responsiveness to patches/issues.
You do use continuous integration, do you?
I learnt swing basics and event handling basics from head first java...
Then i read a few tutorials on swing app development using netbeans...
and i loved it as i don't have to care about layouts and stuff...
But i read in one of the forums, that i should learn swings properly rather than using netbeans directly...
This confused me a bit....
Please suggest the best way to master development of swing apps....
thanks in advance
Well, I see I'm going to run counter to the majority here ;-)
Hand coding GUIs is a pain in the ass. Anything that makes that task easier is a good thing in my book. When you're just starting, having a generated GUI lets you get up and running faster.
GUI builders handle the really repetitive work and prevent you from doing the most common dumb things. The downside is that same approach will also prevent you from doing the really clever things. Eventually, you will encounter something that you cannot do through the GUI builder and you will need to poke into the code. So, you can't treat code generators like black boxes where you don't need to know what magic happens inside. At minimum, you need white boxes. Let the GUI builder do its magic, but understand that magic and its limitations.
Practice by generating a very simple GUI. Walk through the code and understand what it does. Make a change through the builder and see how the generated code changes. Try changing the code yourself to confirm you understanding is correct. *
If you don't understand something, hit the JavaDocs, the Swing Trail, or browse through the Java2S Swing Tutorials.
If you're still stuck try the kind folks at Java Ranch, or here on StackOverflow.
* Netbeans puts the generated code in guarded blocks and will not let you edit them directly. However, you can open the file in another editor to test a change. Also, you can do quite a lot to influence the code generation using the code tab in the properties window.
It depends on what you see as your goal.
There is no "perfect" approach to get comfortable using Java and swing, it always depends on what you want the outcome to be like.
Most enterprises depend on stability and speed, programmers need to write code fast and stable. If you write complex interfaces by hand it gets ugly when it comes to speed and precision at the same time. You can never write better code in terms of "it is working" then the netbeans gui builder can. Also, no one will probably have a look at your code once the application is up and running.
If you want to get to know swing only for the purpose of knowing it with no deeper intention what so ever, I'd recommend learning it by heart without netbeans as you'll probably familiarize yourself with most of it's functionality quicker then the other way around.
On one hand, if I want to learn something, I want to learn it from scratch, so I would probably go with writing swing-code myself and in the end using netbeans to generate it when I am fully able to comprehend what is generated.
On the other hand, if I need to write applications quick and am not paid to go into any details, I'd simply use netbeans.
I think you have answered yourself... you want to master development of swing apps...
everything that you do by autogenerating without knowing why or how is not mastering in my opinion ;)
If you want to be master, then you should at least know how to do it with your bare hands. Moreover, it will also help you if you will use other gui toolkits (main principles of gui toolkits are more or less the same, imho).
UML Round-Trip Engineering tools with seamless synchronization?
The Rational suite purports to do it. But it's so pricey and clunky at drawing (worse than the Rose days) that it's not in the reach of most departments.
What’s amazing is that the free Bouml seems to do a fantastic job. It’s just feels too clunky to use. It has a great deal of functionality, is free (!), very fast, and reverse-engineers complex C++ very well. It also has some nice diagram support, including a very nice sequence diagram. Although the interface is unpolished (and constantly opens dialogs on the rightmost monitor), it does have the beginnings of a very capable product. It's a shame that the interface is so bare-bones and requires the expenditure of a lot of effort. Maybe it's because the author puts most of his time into the actual functionality. Does anyone have experience using Bouml throughout the product lifecycle?
That leaves the pricey MagicDraw, the very-capable yet reasonably-priced Enterprise Architect, and the slick-looking Visual Paradigm. Of these, only Visual Paradigm had an issue reverse-engineering my project's C++ headers.
MagicDraw has a strange, old feel. It does a good job at reverse-engineering on its own, although it remains to be seen whether round-trip engineering of complex C++ projects is seamless. They want over $1800 for the multi-language version, so it's priced similarly to Rational tools.
Enterprise Architect, although far less expensive than most, seems like it may be the most feature complete. It parses and generates C++ flawlessly. Even the comments and formatting are left intact. There are great training materials. But it doesn't handle Objective-C, so less useful for iOS and Mac OS X mixed code projects. The automatic Sequence Diagram generation sounds awesome, but sounds like it only works on Windows .NET projects.
Visual Architect (>$800 for multi-language 2-way) is bar far the best-looking software modeling tool I've come across. Although it may have some round-trip issues remaining, it is a pleasure to use for building the models by hand. It's even nicer than Rose was in some ways. It has an intuitive way of bringing up the tools you need right at the cursor. Yet as I mentioned, it currently falls short of the goal to keep the model in sync with the source. And it often doesn't even give notification that the import didn't fully work, or that duplicate classes have been created (with the same names). It also makes entry of message parameters difficult, using dialogs, whereas others allow the parameters to be changed right on the diagram. (The free Bouml excels at this, as does MagicDraw and others.)
Has anyone found a multi-language (Java, C++, C#, ObjC++, Python, Ruby, SQL) round-trip engineering tool that will hold up to real world projects, where customizations are handled (like custom parameters on messages), yet are not wiped out by the next source code import?
And where all the formatting and comments are completely preserved on generation. Close is not really good enough. If the tools mess up the source code formatting, no developer is going to want the tool run on his source.
Peter Coad's Together-J used to have diagrams and an editor together in one IDE (hence the name). Change a diagram and the code changes; same for the other way as well.
The UML tool and editor were both a bit slow. I think machines of the day were underpowered and didn't show it off to best advantage.
I believe Peter Coad sold it to Borland. Looks like Borland is out of the IDE business. You can still get it here.
I think IntelliJ is the best Java IDE there is. You can generate some nice UML diagrams using it.
The real question is: Why is UML so important? I'd rather have code. I usually do enough UML to get the idea across, write the code with unit tests, and then reverse engineer it for documentation. You can't debug or unit test UML diagrams. Better to have working code.
Bouml ... constantly opens dialogs on the rightmost monitor
in a multiple monitor configuration the best is to indicate to Bouml which monitor must be used by default, else for Bouml you have just a very large monitor including all your monitors. Of course to indicate a default monitor doesn't means you can't use the other one(s), and it is possible to move the dialogs/main window where you want. The definition of the default monitor to use is done through the environment dialog.
Enterprise Architect seems to do a good job at this. As you point out, it's reasonably-priced. And it will also generate diagrams and documentation, as well as import/export source code.