Design Patterns vs. better languages - comp.lang.lisp

Message from discussion Design Patterns vs. better languages

Richard P. Gabriel

View profile

More options Nov 23 2001, 1:07 pm

Newsgroups: comp.lang.lisp

From: "Richard P. Gabriel" <r...@dreamsongs.com>

Date: Fri, 23 Nov 2001 10:07:12 -0800

Local: Fri, Nov 23 2001 1:07 pm

Subject: Re: Design Patterns vs. better languages

  Reply to author
  |
  Forward
  | Print
  | View thread
  | Show original
  | Report this message
  | Find messages by this author
  

in article fbc0f5d1.0111220404.769d4...@posting.google.com, Tim Bradshaw at
tfb+goo...@tfeb.org wrote on 11/22/01 4:04:

> Unfortunately
> the patterns community seems to be riddled with the sort of cultism
> that is so common in computing (it seems to have happened to XP too,
> which is sad), and I'm kind of averse to that

There is a fine line to observers between cult and culture. I have been part
of the patterns community since it started, and it has a strong culture
derived from the community's interest in making developing software easier
and using software better for end users. There are a number of people in the
community who believe the works of Christopher Alexander are getting at
something important. I believe this as well - in many ways what the patterns
community is saying about the advantages of patterns and pattern languages
are what we were saying were the advantages of Lisp.

Patterns are about what to build, not how to build it.

People who believe in Alexander use his vocabulary, just as many of you use
the vocabulary of McCarthy, Moon, Steele, and - consider this - me. This
makes them seem a little cultish, as does your use of a culture-specific
language. Think about how some folks in the Lisp community feel denotational
semantics is important or #F is better than NIL. This is cultish. Or is it
cultural?

XP came out of the patterns community and by the same people who started the
patterns movement, so it's not odd that that community would be built based
on a strong cultural basis.

There is really a lot to patterns and the patterns community, though that
community is in decline. If you want to find out about it, try reading
Alexander's "The Oregon Experiment," which I think is the easiest, quickest
way to see the ideas. After that "The Timeless Way of Building." A long
time ago I wrote a bunch of essays explaining the ideas to the OO community
which were collected in a book. If you have a friend who has the book you
can take a look at those essays.

But don't dismiss patterns because of the GoF - much of the patterns
community derides that work as well. Think of the GoF as helping losers lose
less.

-rpg-

Reply to author Forward