Coding the Architecture - developer tag

Becoming more architecturally aware - part 2

Tue, 28 Oct 2008 20:18:49 GMT

Last time I talked about how we need to understand how application frameworks are designed and work behind the scenes in order to produce code that is consistent and compliant with the overall architectural principles. The second aspect that we need to become architecturally aware about is the underlying technology.

Again, let's put this in context of my current .NET project. I have much more Java experience than .NET experience; I've written some C# and I've played with Silverlight, but ASP.NET is new to me. Thankfully, the concepts behind ASP.NET translate fairly directly with those behind JSP, so it's not as if I'm tackling this from a standing start. Having said that, I've felt that it's really important to get to grips with the underlying architecture of the technology so I can be sure that the code I write, again, integrates properly into the overall architecture. An example here would be the ASP.NET page life cycle. Like JSP, ASP.NET pages have a series of things that happen to them when a request is made, which includes creation of the request/response objects, page compilation, page instantiation, calling page event handlers and so on.

Knowing the finer details of a programming language is one thing, although using or not using new language features such as generics isn't necessarily going to negatively affect the architectural integrity of the solution. Not understanding something like the page life cycle of ASP.NET could. For example, it's important to understand the page life cycle so that you understand when objects can be shared/cached. Session management is another important thing to understand, and blindly throwing objects into the user's session can have architectural implications if your application needs to scale horizontally and you need to implement transparent session failover using session replication.

Being more architecturally aware doesn't necessarily mean that you need to understand the entirety of the bigger picture, but you should understand how to write code that is architecturally compliant. And that means understanding more about how the underlying technologies work.

Becoming more architecturally aware - part 1

Fri, 17 Oct 2008 09:06:00 GMT

In my Mind the gap essay and Why Software Projects Fail presentation, I talk about how we as developers should be more architecturally aware if we are to bridge the gap between the code and the overall design. I include myself in this statement because recently I've started adding functionality to an existing ASP.NET website and I've found it essential that I become as architecturally aware as possible in a short amount of time. Let me provide a couple of real world examples.

Although I'm adding behaviour that is in effect isolated from the rest of the application, my code is still a constituent part of the overall architecture. In addition, I'm using some of the utilities and frameworks that the development team have already produced. Clearly I need to understand the usage patterns in order that I can be productive as a developer on the team but, furthermore, I need to understand something about the inner workings in order that the code I write is architecturally compliant with the rest of the system. I'm sure you've seen this yourself, but give a few people the same framework and you'll see usage patterns that you hadn't even dreamed of. Some will be what you expected, some may be better than what you expected and some may break your framework in horrible ways.

If somebody on the team is taking responsibility for the architecture and undertaking reviews, it's possible to catch those instances where application framework code isn't being used as anticipated. Sometimes, it's even possible to automate these architectural conflicts with a set of automated unit tests. If, however, nobody is taking on this architectural guardian role and everybody is simply using what they've been provided with, then this is where problems start to creep in. Sometimes they creep in from people adopting a copy-paste approach to development (i.e. copying another class because it "works") and sometimes they creep in because people just aren't aware of the hidden side effects of their framework usage pattern. Either way, problems introduced because of a lack of architectural awareness might not show up during local single-user testing, but could prove critical when the system is rolled out to a wider user base.

The only way to get really productive with existing application code is to dive into it and understand how it works at both a conceptual and implementation level. Only then can you ensure that the code being written is compliant with the rest of the architecture, which is crucial for the quality and integrity of the solution. This is one way in which developers should become more architecturally aware and next time I'll discuss another.

Mind the gap

Fri, 02 May 2008 10:58:03 GMT

Our industry has a love/hate relationship with the software architect role, with many organisations dismissing it because of their negative experiences of architects that dictate from "ivory towers" and aren't engaged with the actual task of building working software. This reputation is damaging the IT industry and inhibiting project success. Things need to change. This essay looks at the gap between software developers and software architects, offering some suggestions on how to reduce this gap and ensure projects are driven to a successful conclusion.

Read the full essay in our book.

Question of the week

Fri, 11 Apr 2008 18:50:17 GMT

This week's question is a common one that I get...

I'm an aspiring software architect and I'm working on a project as a developer. I'm not going to get an architect role without having some experience, but we already have an architect on my project. What should I do and how do I start down the architect path?

First of all, just because you've not got the word "architect" in your current job title that doesn't mean that you're not involved in the architecture. Consider the skills you've demonstrated as a developer - how would you rate yourself on the role profile? At review, or interview, if you can highlight the "architectural" nature of your experience you might find you can break free of this paradox.

As for building your experience, my recommendation is to take some time to study the architecture of the system that you are currently working on. What is the architecture? How does it work? Why has it been designed that way? These are all questions that you can use to understand the decisions that the architect(s) made. Better still, though, try to spend some time with the architect(s). Tell them about your aspirations and ask them if they can spend some time to walk you through what they are doing and understand the decisions they are making. If the architect is open to having their own work reviewed then this is another opportunity to become more involved. Finally, why not ask to be involved in some of the smaller architecturally significant decisions and work; such as proofs of concept, prototypes and product selection.

Just don't expect some epiphany where you suddenly feel like an architect! As this advice for apprentice architects implies, there are various skills and experiences that you need and will continue to develop. At some point you've got to step outside your comfort zone and experience to develop these skills. Good luck!