Quinn Gil

I'm sitting in my hotel room after the [deliver:Agile2019] conference (https://www.agilealliance.org/deliveragile-2019/) which was fantastic. I highly recommend attending it next year. I have a little side project I'm trying to use to learn Azure and Azure Dev Ops. At

This post is absolutely a "I don't have a post" filler post. MicroObjects I'm working on a couple of refactoring "kata" type projects. One is for MicroObejct technical practices. I'm trying to do them all as "FizzBuzz" but.

Quality-wise of this post; not gonna lie - Probably will be low. It's 7am and I'm low on posts. This isn't a bubbling pressing issue on my mind. I don't need to stream my thoughts to work through something... What I do need... is

Simpler code. Don't we all wish the code we deal with could be simple? Simple is hard. Simple is challenging. Simple is complex. A short letter is much harder to write than a long one. Why do you think my blog posts are so

There's a lot of tools that exist to make what developers to easier to do. If it's something we do a lot, we tend to find ways to have something do it for us. I've done it. I'll probably do it again. I built

There's a lot of tools that exist to make what developers to easier to do. If it's something we do a lot, we tend to find ways to have something do it for us. I've done it. I'll probably do it again. I built

I've had a lot of discussions around applying the MicroObject technical practices to legacy code. "These practices are clearly great for new code, but how can we work them into our existing code?" Even if it's not your definition of legacy code;

James Shore has a post, Testing Without Mocks, that I've recently been introduced to. Skimming through the introduction of the post, it looks like the goals of this align well with what MicroObjects give us in terms of testability. I'm going to go through

I have a GitHub project FluentTypes which I've written about before. The goal is to avoid the problems of Primitive Obsession. We want to represent what we're thinking. After working in MicroObjects style and using the style represented by the Fluent Types; I found

The legacy code I'm playing with at work had some nice future proofing. It wasn't quite big design up front, but it was some future proofing. I got some out, but there's still a whole level of abstraction that's pending removal. I'm not here

When refactoring from a large to small API, use interfaces for the new methods, but leave the old public IFF they are well tested. Its not worth re-working all the tests when they're hidden by using the interface This is a short little post

Working in legacy code makes it clear how important refactoring is to maintainability. I'll go so far with the importance of Refactoring to say, "If the code isn't refactored, it isn't maintainable." Clearly I think this is a huge thing. One of

What is a DataBag? I consider a databag any object that primarily acts as transportation for data. In C++, this would be a struct. Ignoring any associated functions, the data's exposed and being passed around. Java would represent a databag by a class with

This is me going through the Android recommendations on how to do databinding. As with A LOT of practices that increase the complexity and harm maintainability; databinding and the recommendations enable, perceived, QUICK development, but it has such a high cost afterwards; there WILL

I started this EARLY into my adventures gettign to understand what Object Oriented Programming is. The UI is always a rough part of the experience. I found some effective ways to deal with it. My latest way is to have the UI do nothing.

I've written before about the technical practice of composition over inheritance but what about the idea that we have NO inheritance? I use inheritance VERY infrequently. I have two cases where I use inheritance. Only when there is clear duplication between classes. I'd have

The Chain of Responsibility is one of the major patterns I use in my MicroObject projects. When I have a sequence of events, applying the practices forces things into a very narrow set of forms. I've found one that I feel is the clearest,

The UI should have no logic That's not strong enough. THE UI MUST DO NOTHING! That's better. The UI is the edge of our system. The edges of our system are hard to test. They interact with things that are not ours. We don't

I've been blogging for two years now. Well... Nearly two years as I write this on Thanksgiving. :) Last year I was in a really good groove cranking out posts. I had a lot fo really new stuff for me. This past 1/2 year

I'm not one to be opening my mouth about these types of things. Let's get that our there right now: I'm super unlikely to identify any of these concerns I'm not gonna be affected if nothing changes My lack of being bothered has zero

There's a lot of tools that exist to make what developers to easier to do. If it's something we do a lot, we tend to find ways to have something do it for us. I've done it. I'll probably do it again. I built

There's a lot of tools that exist to make what developers to easier to do. If it's something we do a lot, we tend to find ways to have something do it for us. I've done it. I'll probably do it again. I built

There's a lot of tools that exist to make what developers to easier to do. If it's something we do a lot, we tend to find ways to have something do it for us. I've done it. I'll probably do it again. I built

No new inline? Coming from a predominately Java and C# background, new is how the language instantiates an object so it's a nice short phrase. When we write a method and need a collaborator, we'll typically instantiate the collaborator right there. public void DoStuff(