about:conflicting_principles
Differences
This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.
about:conflicting_principles [2013-09-01 11:40] – created christian | about:conflicting_principles [2013-09-01 11:42] (current) – christian | ||
---|---|---|---|
Line 3: | Line 3: | ||
===== Pareto-optimal solutions ===== | ===== Pareto-optimal solutions ===== | ||
- | Each principle describes a certain aspect of the problem. For example [[principles: | + | Each principle describes a certain aspect of the problem. For example [[principles: |
This is a typical example of two conflicting principles. Both are valid. A solution is better (wrt. ease of writing, ease of use, readability and potential for fault introduction) when it is simpler. And a solution is better (wrt. reusability and changeability) when it is more general. These principles are conflicting. A solution normally is either simple or generally applicable but not both. As the aspects, the principles refer to, are typically not binary, adherence to the principles can be informally rated on a gradual scale. A good | This is a typical example of two conflicting principles. Both are valid. A solution is better (wrt. ease of writing, ease of use, readability and potential for fault introduction) when it is simpler. And a solution is better (wrt. reusability and changeability) when it is more general. These principles are conflicting. A solution normally is either simple or generally applicable but not both. As the aspects, the principles refer to, are typically not binary, adherence to the principles can be informally rated on a gradual scale. A good | ||
Line 40: | Line 40: | ||
This approach does not tell which of the four good solutions should be chosen (only solution 2 is sorted out). It is more a way of thinking than a general method. Rating solutions with real numbers or even visualizing the solution space graphically (like in the figure above) is not necessary and in most cases also not helpful. But stating that the design decision to make is a question of simplicity versus general applicability is a valuable statement which helps the designer to find an appropriate solution. The approach is about exploring | This approach does not tell which of the four good solutions should be chosen (only solution 2 is sorted out). It is more a way of thinking than a general method. Rating solutions with real numbers or even visualizing the solution space graphically (like in the figure above) is not necessary and in most cases also not helpful. But stating that the design decision to make is a question of simplicity versus general applicability is a valuable statement which helps the designer to find an appropriate solution. The approach is about exploring | ||
- | the dimensions of the solution space to a given design problem. | + | the dimensions of the solution space to a given design problem |
- | + |
about/conflicting_principles.txt · Last modified: 2013-09-01 11:42 by christian