RE: [GD-General] Architecture Design
Brought to you by:
vexxed72
Menu
▾
▴
RE: [GD-General] Architecture Design
|
From: Philip H. <ph...@me...> - 2001-10-08 12:02:20
|
I appear to be in the minority so far but I do design code up front. I do= n=92t use any of the formal methods you mentioned but I have gotten =91hardcore= =92 in the past and done UML design for one subsystem, to see how it worked out.= In my opinion the tools aren=92t really good enough yet but the principle is good. When we=92re approaching a new system we discuss the problem with anyone = on the programming team that=92s interested and come up with a preferred solution, using UML for producing diagrams on the trusty whiteboard. Thes= e solutions are usually the combination of everyone=92s good ideas rather t= han a selection of good and bad ones from one person. Whoever is implementing the system then documents the approach we=92re ta= king. This often includes documenting the actual classes although usually only = the public functions (as we=92re using C++). This documentation stage is essential, it always throws up issues with the design and is the best tim= e to refine it. This also has the side effect of producing documents for newcomers to look at and get up to speed and everyone on the team has at least some idea of how all the systems work. In my experience this approach is always quicker than just sitting down a= nd writing the code. Not to mention the fact the code will be more robust an= d need a lot less changes. In the past the code which causes problems has b= een that which was put together without being designed first. Invariably the code is then revised and expanded as the project=92s needs are really understood. I could go on for a long time about this but in my opinion anyone who doe= sn=92 t do at least some design work on code is very unwise. It=92s not easy to= get right, you can very easily over design but with a bit of practice the benefits are immense. Philip Harris BatFish Studios Ltd > -----Original Message----- > From: gam...@li... > [mailto:gam...@li...]On Behalf Of > Jamie Fowlston > Sent: 08 October 2001 12:52 > To: gam...@li... > Subject: RE: [GD-General] Architecture Design > > > Maybe the leads should have an idea of how everything works. > Haven't seen it > happen. Depending on what you mean by 'how everything works' :) > > Code has to be discussed, yes. Communication is obviously vital. > > I do think design should work, and should help. Just haven't experience= d > it.... > > Jamie > > > -----Original Message----- > From: gam...@li... > [mailto:gam...@li...]On Behalf Of > Tom Nuydens > Sent: 08 October 2001 12:39 > To: gam...@li... > Subject: RE: [GD-General] Architecture Design > > > Hi, > > Even if you split up the work and just piece things together later on, = I > think at least _some_ design work is necessary. At the very least, > shouldn't the project lead have an overview of how everything works? > > We don't get excessively formal about the design process either, but we > do use UML class diagrams as a means of communication. I find the > diagrams to be very helpful when trying to explain ideas to other team > members (or the other way around). You _do_ occasionally discuss your > code with your fellow team members, don't you? > > - Tom > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: gam...@li... > > [mailto:gam...@li...] On > > Behalf Of Erwin de Vries > > Sent: Monday, October 08, 2001 12:50 > > To: gam...@li... > > Subject: Re: [GD-General] Architecture Design > > > > > > I've never heard of this as well. I know the drill, but its > > simply not worth it in most cases. For some cases it might > > be, but generally there is no need for formal diagrams in > > those cases. (IMO) > > > > Erwin > > > > (ARGH! Damn reply issues!) > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "Jamie Fowlston" <ja...@qu...> > > To: <gam...@li...> > > Sent: Monday, October 08, 2001 12:14 > > Subject: RE: [GD-General] Architecture Design > > > > > > > People design code? :) > > > > > > Sorry, in my experience, there's some division of tasks (someone > > > writes renderer, physics, whatever), then it gets glued > > together. Very > > > little design work.... > > > > > > Jamie > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: gam...@li... > > > [mailto:gam...@li...]On > > Behalf Of > > > Parveen Kaler > > > Sent: 07 October 2001 23:10 > > > To: gam...@li... > > > Subject: [GD-General] Architecture Design > > > > > > > > > Just a little bit of a survey. After the gameplay and > > story of a game > > > has been somewhat fleshed out, what kind of techniques do > > you guys use > > > to design the code? I'm assuming everyone uses diagrams > > such as ORDs, > > > ERDs, and DFDs or some variant. Is this true? How detailed do you > > > guys get? > > > > > > Does anyone get hardcore and actually use UML and tools > > like Rational > > > Rose? Are there people out there who have worked on both game > > > projects > > and > > > common desktop applications? How did the design techniques > > differ, if > > > at all? > > > > > > Parveen > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > Gamedevlists-general mailing list > > > Gam...@li... > > > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gamedevlists-general > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > Gamedevlists-general mailing list > > > Gam...@li... > > > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gamedevlists-general > > > > > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Gamedevlists-general mailing list > > Gam...@li... > > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gamedevlists-general > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Gamedevlists-general mailing list > Gam...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gamedevlists-general > > > _______________________________________________ > Gamedevlists-general mailing list > Gam...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gamedevlists-general > |
