﻿<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?><rss version="2.0"><channel><title>Ayende @ Rahien</title><link>http://ayende.com</link><description>Ayende @ Rahien</description><copyright>Copyright (C) Ayende Rahien  2004 - 2021 (c) 2026</copyright><ttl>60</ttl><item><title>Ayende Rahien commented on Refactoring for Separation Of Concerns: A real world example</title><description>I had a different goal in mind when I wrote the code, and I didn't notice the problem until I tried to actually use the extension points that I provided.
</description><link>http://ayende.com/3144/refactoring-for-separation-of-concerns-a-real-world-example#comment2</link><guid>http://ayende.com/3144/refactoring-for-separation-of-concerns-a-real-world-example#comment2</guid><pubDate>Thu, 14 Feb 2008 22:52:32 GMT</pubDate></item><item><title>Gauthier Segay commented on Refactoring for Separation Of Concerns: A real world example</title><description>Nice drop on refactoring.
  
  
Could you tell us what led you to the initial design without applying separation of concern from straight?
  
  
Was it the urge to get your implementation usable to solve a specific need?
  
  
Was it "blindness"?
  
  
Was it something else?
  
  
When I design/sketch/develop some concept, I tend to extract as much as possible to the exposed contract, just leaving the bare minimum available to the outside world to reach the need.
  
  
But there is still a problem with me: it's that I'm not the author of kickass frameworks such as you :)
  
  
"Of course, I just finished writing half a chapter about the old way of doing things... Time for a rewrite."
  
  
Don't you know rewriter#? ;)
</description><link>http://ayende.com/3144/refactoring-for-separation-of-concerns-a-real-world-example#comment1</link><guid>http://ayende.com/3144/refactoring-for-separation-of-concerns-a-real-world-example#comment1</guid><pubDate>Thu, 14 Feb 2008 21:45:39 GMT</pubDate></item></channel></rss>