Software application development
This blog is intended to provoke discussion and exchange between like minded software application developers, engineers, architects, project managers - and keen hobbyists too.
Thursday 16 August 2007, 9:25 PM
Parallel processing or perish?
So I was trying to have a quiet hangover and mix with the good and the great of the industry the other morning at yet another technical meeting. I think I would have been quiet happy to thumb through various leaflets and cast a lazy eye over the odd press release or two, but no. It was not to be. Somebody wanted to engage me in a discussion on parallel processing and dual/quad core technologies.
As much as I wanted to succumb to the combined soporific effects of jet lag and the previous night’s over indulgence I quickly realised yet again why I love the software industry so much. We soon found ourselves immersed in a conversation on the relative merits of multi-core processors.
Although I know Intel is keen to tell us now that we need to develop with parallel processing in mind, the reality – it seems – is that so many applications are not built from the ground up to take advantage of multi core.
This means of course that if two streams of a multi-threaded app are trying to write to and/or read from memory at times that do not happily coincide, then rather than getting a speed boost from dual core processing, they are in fact subject to a hold up.
The official line from Intel (and this is taken from a meeting I had earlier this year with Intel’s lead evangelist & director of marketing James Reinders) is as follows, “I’m quite convinced that the ‘non-parallel’ era will appear to be a very primitive time in the history of computers when people look back in a hundred years,” he said. “Within a decade, a programmer who does not think parallel first will not be a programmer. The tools in this new world do not need to be radically different – but they need to address key problems related to abstraction of thread management and correctness verification.”
OK cool, but we’re not there yet are we? Just how far does parallel processing pervade into the way you approach development at the moment I wonder?
Monday 13 August 2007, 11:04 PM
What’s in a domain name?
I read today that the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) is taking another step towards its goal of bringing new generic Top-Level Domains (gTLDs) online with the launch of a public consultation on a key report from ICANN’s Generic Names Supporting Organization (GNSO).
The top-level domain arena, of course this is the part of the domain name that comes after the last dot, could soon new hundreds of new internationalised options introduced. Bringing in new domain names is all about satisfying competition from the market, but (says ICANN) it’s also about preserving the security, stability and interoperability of the Internet.
The report raises some interesting questions – like how to deal with proposals that may be considered controversial by some groups or individuals. Where will it all end I wonder? Will we see ‘dot roof’ introduced for roofing contractors? How about ‘dot slice’ for pizza parlours? Or will that see plastic surgeons done out of the top-level domain they had been hoping for?
Is this is PR disaster and political correctness battle waiting to happen do you think?
Saturday 11 August 2007, 8:08 PM
Architectural angst
I met something of a software guru at an industry event last night. His name was Mr Xiao-Yun Wang. Originally Chinese and now living in France with a French wife working for a US company, this guy had a fair spread of global industry knowledge.
He was in fact a software architect, but he made sure he let me know that he also ‘worked on development too’. Now, most of us know the basic difference between architecture and development, but I always like to play dumb and see if I can get a fresh take on the two disciplines.
So here’s what he said:
Development for Xiao is (unsurprisingly) concerned with the minutiae of a project. It is within the walls of the job in hand and its practitioners often fail to look outside at the real world – even if they are involved with requirements management.
Architecture on the other hand is bigger picture. OK, we knew that. But Xiao did have a nice way of putting it, “We look at the outside world. We look at the competition and this is not something that developers often do. We look at technology trends right across the market place to try and understand what customers will demand before they even ask for it,” he said.
For me, I think that when people consider software architecture they don’t always think about these kind of external commercial considerations as part of the big picture. So in fact, the bigger picture might be even bigger than you thought.
So, while we’re on this subject. A while back now I spoke with Matt Deacon, the chief architectural advisor for Microsoft UK’s developer and platform group. He pointed out that the UK’s Royal Institute for Building Architects (RIBA) is aware of the use of the term ‘architect’ in job titles within the technology industry.
Here’s what RIBA has to say on the subject:
“The board is aware of widespread use within the computer and IT industry of the word ‘architect’ being incorporated into certain job descriptions, for example ‘Systems Architect’ or ‘Software Architect’. While such use may be a technical breach of the Act, the reason for and intention of continued regulation of the title is principally to ensure that consumers of architects’ services are guaranteed a certain standard and quality of work.”
Microsoft’s Deacon made an interesting point, as long as you’re not the IT architect responsible for the software program that was used by a building architect to design a building that then immediately fell down because of a design flaw in your software design then I guess you’re safe from being sued, well, by the Royal Institute of British Architect (RIBA) at least. After all, who’s ever heard of someone dying as a direct result of a poor design decision made by an IT architect?
Saturday 11 August 2007, 7:49 PM
Why oh why no Wi-Fi?
I'm just in the midst of posting a longer blog entry – and doing it using the wonderfully FREE Wi-Fi Internet coverage at Las Vegas McCarren Airport (yes, really, free, no strings attached – they have already taken your money in the casino, they just want you to e-mail and get home safe).
Why can’t all airports be like this please?
Tuesday 7 August 2007, 2:49 PM
Curse of the Cowboy Coders
I seem to mixing with a huge number of software engineers this week. I am at a software symposium after all, so it’s no big surprise. But my word, what an opinionated crowd you can run into sometimes. Actually, it’s more than just sometimes isn’t it? There’s very often a sense of the ‘prima donna’ attitude among developers where they feel that one or two individuals in a coding team or project are carrying along eight or nine other ‘cowboy coders’, who are simply there to make up the numbers.
Sounds like the classic 80:20 rule here doesn’t it?
Now this is only an opinion, but this could of course be down to the form and function of the workload types assigned across the project. Not every engineer will be responsible for front-end integration, architectural re-designs, GUIs or even requirements management. Some will be classic data crunchers and this may, just may, appear to be less creative, less maverick and less likely to be perceived as the shining light of the project.
However, we can keep those ‘prima donnas’ in check if we apply the ‘under-a-bus’ rule right? However valuable they think they are, if they went under a bus tomorrow, would the rest of team be able to pick up their work and run? Have they annotated, planned and reported at every level so that the so-called cowboys (or cow-girls) at the back of the room could move into the spotlight?
Does this mirror your working environment? Do you spy a cowboy on the horizon?
Previous
