<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Thursday Night &#187; Great Books</title>
	<atom:link href="http://blog.paulbetts.org/index.php/category/programming/great-books/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://blog.paulbetts.org</link>
	<description>Paul Betts's personal website / blog / what-have-you</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 24 Aug 2010 04:43:11 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2</generator>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
			<item>
		<title>Great Programming Books: Fowler&#8217;s &#8220;Refactoring&#8221;</title>
		<link>http://blog.paulbetts.org/index.php/2008/09/18/great-programming-books-fowlers-refactoring/</link>
		<comments>http://blog.paulbetts.org/index.php/2008/09/18/great-programming-books-fowlers-refactoring/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 18 Sep 2008 18:51:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Paul Betts</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Great Books]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Programming]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.paulbetts.org/index.php/2008/09/18/great-programming-books-fowlers-refactoring/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[
As a part of my goal of learning as much as possible about programming, I&#8217;ve set out to read all of the &#8220;classics&#8221; of Computer Science / Engineering books. And since everyone has their own definition of what a classic is, I&#8217;ll share my own $0.02 on the subject.


Of course, if I stuck to the [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>
As a part of my goal of learning as much as possible about programming, I&#8217;ve set out to read all of the &#8220;classics&#8221; of Computer Science / Engineering books. And since everyone has their own definition of what a classic is, I&#8217;ll share my own $0.02 on the subject.
</p>
<p>
Of course, if I stuck to the traditional knowledge of the subject, I&#8217;d have the same list that everyone else has, so I&#8217;ll try to be a little bit more unique through the series and put a few books on there that might not be typical. These are books that improve your perspective on how to design and write software, as well as specific technology books that I find to be really well-written and useful, even if they don&#8217;t teach anything specifically about software design.
</p>
<p>
However, this first book isn&#8217;t atypical at all, but it&#8217;s something that changed how I approach programming, especially when working with others&#8217; code. And the fact of the matter is, after you&#8217;re done learning how to program and start working professionally in the field, you&#8217;ll most likely be working frequently with other people&#8217;s code. Even if you&#8217;re a one-man shop, learning to refactor properly will make adding features to your code easier and cleaner, and helps you to write elegant, maintainable code.
</p>
<p align="center">
<a href="http://www.amazon.com/Refactoring-Improving-Existing-Addison-Wesley-Technology/dp/0201485672%3FSubscriptionId%3D1N9AHEAQ2F6SVD97BE02%26tag%3Dthurnigh-20%26linkCode%3Dxm2%26camp%3D2025%26creative%3D165953%26creativeASIN%3D0201485672"><br />
<img src="http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/519XT0DER6L._SL500_.jpg" /><br />
<i><b>Refactoring</b></i> by Martin Fowler</a>
</p>
<p>
One of the best things that Fowler discusses in the book is, not only what refactoring is or how to do it, but <i>when</i> to do it. his cheat sheet in the back of the book identifies what he calls &#8220;code smell&#8221; &#8211; common code mistakes that result in lousy code, and what to do about them.
</p>
<p>
If you take away only one thing from this book, it&#8217;s this: if you go to add a feature to existing code and it&#8217;s not trivially easy to add in, <i>refactor the code until it is.</i> Hacking in code all over the place to make something happen will work for awhile, but you&#8217;ll eventually turn the code into an unmaintainable mess.
</p>
<p>
And if you have room for two things, here&#8217;s the 2nd takeaway: unit tests are very important, they let you refactor the code without wondering if you broke anything. If you spend time debugging an issue, it helps you <b>exactly one time</b>. You could spend an equal amount of time writing a unit test that catches the issue, and it helps you <b>over and over</b>.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://blog.paulbetts.org/index.php/2008/09/18/great-programming-books-fowlers-refactoring/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
