我以往也没有自q认识Q不q，最q我有自q看法
软g设计思想的发展逻辑Q大致是提高抽象E度 Qseperation of concern E度?br /> fn(design )= fn1(abstraction )+ fn2(seperation of concern).
׃大规模数据处理时代的来Q下一代设计范式的重点Q?br />
- 是如何提高concurrent programing 的抽象程??seperation of concern E度?/li>
- 至于dsl Q我研究不多Q不q，按照以上的公式，也确实是一个好的方向?/li>
对于英文词语的用，是因为，我想更能表达我的意思，不至于误解。见谅?br /> Ƣ迎批评指正Q?
]]>
* 英文指南
* 配置tomcat
o 修改 server.xml ,在connector ?URIEncoding="UTF-8"
o 修改 catalina.sh ,加一?CATALINA_OPTS="-DHUDSON_HOME=~/apprun/hudsonhome/ -Xms512m -Xmx512m"
+ 其中 HUDSON_HOME ?hudson 的配|和q行文g所在地
o 修改 tomcat-users.xml
+ <role rolename="admin"/>
+ <user username="hudson" password="hudson" roles="admin"/>
* 把下载的hudson.war 攑֜ tomcat 的webapps 下，hudson 会自动启动v来，部v完成了
o 可以讉KQ比?http://****:18080/hudson/
* 安装 jdk
* 安装 ant
* 配置hudson
o 配置和管理需要登?Qlogin
o 打开理面Q比?http://****:18080/hudson/configure
o 配置安全 QEnable security Q两个选项QDelegate to servlet container --〉Legacy mode
o 配置 jdk 路径Q?比如 /home/**/tools/jdk1.6.0_13/
o 配置 ant 路径Q?比如 /home/**/apprun/ant171
o 配置 System Admin E-mail Address Q?/写一个很多项目公用的email
o 记得 save
* 新徏一个job
o 配置和管理需要登?Qlogin
o new job ,选项 QBuild a free-style software project
o 配置 Q比?Q?*:18080/hudson/job/icontent/configure
+ 填写svn 路径 Q比?Qhttp://svn.****
+ Build TriggersQ选Poll SCM Qschedule W合 cron 规则
+ Build Qinvoke ant ,填写 ant target
+ Post-build Actions ,?E-mail Notification , Recipients 填写邮g地址
* 配置linux 的环境变?br /> o vi .bash_profile
o JAVA_HOME=$HOME/tools/jdk1.6.0_13
o PATH=$JAVA_HOME/bin:$PATH:$HOME/bin:$HOME/apprun/ant171/bin
o LANG=zh_CN.GB2312 //encoding ?java 源代码文件的~码一?Q这样javadoc 不会有警?br /> o LC_CTYPE=zh_CN.GB2312
easyQ?br /> great tool!
]]>
]]>
The design model resides at the core of the software engineering process. It is the place where quality is built into the software (and the place where quality is assessed. For this checklist, the more questions that elicit a negative response, the higher the risk that the analysis model will adequately serve its purpose. . For this checklist, the more questions that elicit a negative response, the higher the risk that the design model will not adequately serve its purpose.
General issues:
o Does the overall design implement all explicit requirements? Has a traceability table been developed?
设计寚w求的匚wQ?br />
o Does the overall design achieve all implicit requirements?
o Is the design represented in a form that is easily understood by outsiders?
易理解？
o Is design notation standardized? Consistent?
o Does the overall design provide sufficient information for test case design?
可测试?br />
o Is the design created using recognizable architectural and procedural patterns?
常用的架?和模式？
o Does the design strive to incorporate reusable components?
重用lgQ?br />
o Is the design modular?
模块?br />
o Has the design defined both procedural and data abstractions that can be reused?
重用的过E?/ 数据 抽象Q?br />
o Has the design been defined and represented in a stepwise fashion?
逐渐l化的表qͼ
o Has the resultant software architecture been partitioned for ease of implementation? Maintenance?
可部|性？ 可维护性？
o Have the concepts of information hiding and functional independence been followed throughout the design?
装性？
o Has a Design Specification been developed for the software?
文档Q?br />
For data design:
o Have data objected defined in the analysis model been properly translated into required data structured?
数据映射with analysisQ?nbsp;
o Do the data structures contain all attributes defined in the analysis model?
数据属性？
o Have any new data structures and/or attributes been defined at design time?
新的数据l构Q?br />
o How do any new data structures and/or attributes related to the analysis model and to overall user requirements?
用户需求与数据l构匚w吗？
o Have the simplest data structures required to do the job been chosen?
数据l构单吗Q?br />
o Can the data structures be implemented directly in the programming language of choice?
~程语言适合数据l构Q?br />
o How are data communicated between software components?
软glg之间的数据交换？
o Do explicit data components (e.g., a database) exist? If so, what is their role?
数据库？
For architectural design:
o Has a library of architectural styles been considered prior to the definition of the resultant software architecture?
架构模式Q?br />
o Has architectural tradeoff analysis been performed?
架构分析的tradeoffQ?br />
o Is the resultant software architecture a recognizable architectural style?
认可的架构风|
o Has the architecture been exercised against existing usage scenarios?
架构有应用示例吗Q?nbsp;
o Has an appropriate mapping been used to translate the analysis model into the architectural model?
分析和架构之间的mappingQ?br />
o Can quality characteristics associated with the resultant architecture (e.g., a factored call-and-return architecture) be readily identified from information provided in the design model?
架构的质量特点？
For user interface design:
o Have the results of task analysis been documented?
o Have goals for each user task been identified?
o Has an action sequence been defined for each user task?
o Have various states of the interface been documented?
o Have objects and actions that appear within the context of the interface been defined?
o Have the three "golden rules" (SEPA, 5/e, p. 402) been maintained throughout the GUI design?
o Has flexible interaction been defined as a design criterion throughout the interface?
o Have expert and novice modes of interaction been defined?
o Have technical internals been hidden from the causal user?
o Is the on-screen metaphor (if any) consistent with the overall applications?
o Are icons clear and understandable?
o Is interaction intuitive?
o Is system response time consistent across all tasks?
o Has an integrated help facility been implemented?
o Are all error message displayed by the interface easy to understand? Do they help the user resolve the problem quickly?
o Is color being used effectively?
o Has a prototype for the interface been developed?
o Have user's impressions of the prototype been collected in an organized manner?
For component-level design:
* Have proof of correctness techniques (SEPA, 5/e, Chapter 26) been applied to all algorithms?
法正确性？
* Has each algorithm been "desk-tested" to uncover errors? Is each algorithm correct?
法Q?br />
* Is the design of the algorithm consistent with the data structured that the component manipulates?
法Q?br /> * Have algorithmic design alternatives been considered? If yes, why was this design chosen?
替代法考虑了吗Q?br />
* Has the complexity of each algorithm been computed?
每个法的复杂性考虑了吗Q?br />
* Have structured programming constructs been used throughout?
l构好吗Q?br />
]]>
加强的部分：
软g目的商业背景， 目的^衡术Q?关键路径的管理?br>
]]>
]]>
]]>
I think the management thought I have some change.
first I think management can't chease.Just choose those can met your culture.Ond shouldn't think use employee and kick off after.
second ,I think corporation's existence not for profit or some great idea .It's for some people who have similar pursue and ideal to make life. these is most important.
three, If you can't layer it ,you can't manage it.real layer should take clear boardary.
]]>
info ,臛_应该昄E序的执行逻辑
debug, 昄数据
所以info 对于发现q行时的错误很重要，要有效的撰写?br />
]]>
use case 设计的经?BR>分层
核心的业务，要优先考虑?BR>分模?BR> x核心的概c?/P>
use case 设计的优?/P>
提供可选的Ҏ
有对比，才有优化?BR>用户接口能否再简?BR> U束住用P用户会感觉麻烦?BR> 不要Ҏ构增加太多的U束?/P>
]]>