Discussions

News: Contract-First or Code-First Design – Part 2

Bookmark and Share Get thread feed

  1. Contract-First or Code-First Design – Part 2 (4 messages)

    • Posted by: Jack Vaughan
    • Posted on: April 16 2007 05:30 EDT
    The second in the series of transcriptions recorded in a bar in London between Ted Neward and Adrian Trenaman is on the code-first/contract-first debate, wherein the question is asked: What price RPC?
    Code-first interfaces may not be well suited for the demands of remote traffic. It's generally accepted that not all procedures or methods should be made remote: if you're going to take on the overhead of a network call then you should maximize the amount of data transmitted with each call. Current coding practices often lead to many fine grained methods (for example, get() and set() methods on Java beans) that are unsuitable for remote access. Early Java-to-WSDL tools generated WSDL on a class/interface level, not allowing you to distinguish between those methods you wanted to expose remotely through the WSDL contract and those you want to remain outside of the contract. Newer tooling using JAX-WS and .NET does allow you to specify remoting on a per-method basis, which alleviates this problem somewhat. However, this tooling relies on network-savvy developers and designers - are they always going to be around to make sure someone not so clued in starts adding poorly designed operations to the interface?
    Contract-First or Code-First Design – Part 2
    Reply to this

    Threaded Messages (4)

  2. Re: Contract-First or Code-First Design – Part 2[ Go to top ]

    Why on the earth should be of any interest two guys having a nice beer talking of warm water ? Guido
    Reply to this Reply to original

  3. Sorry[ Go to top ]

    Sorry. This was a bad url...instead try... http://tssblog.techtarget.com/index.php/contract-first-or-code-first-design-part-2/
    Reply to this Reply to original

  4. who cares[ Go to top ]

    Who cares what two drunk people are talking in a bar
    Reply to this Reply to original

  5. Interesting...[ Go to top ]

    This article was very interesting in terms of conversation presented by the writer Thanks Mittal
    Reply to this Reply to original