Thanks for your insights, Kent. The distinction you draw between unchanging tests and controllability is illuminating, and I appreciate the nuanced approach of the test Desiderata as compared to simply stating "strive for unchanging tests."
Your perspective on controllability brings to mind the interplay between data and interface. It see…
Thanks for your insights, Kent. The distinction you draw between unchanging tests and controllability is illuminating, and I appreciate the nuanced approach of the test Desiderata as compared to simply stating "strive for unchanging tests."
Your perspective on controllability brings to mind the interplay between data and interface. It seems to me that if a data structure already adequately abstracts the underlying dependencies, it could serve as the ideal point of balance between abstraction and concreteness, thereby enhancing controllability. However, in the absence of such a data structure, relying on an interface might be the necessary course of action.
In your experience, what are some guiding principles or considerations when deciding between data and interface for enhancing controllability?
Thanks for your insights, Kent. The distinction you draw between unchanging tests and controllability is illuminating, and I appreciate the nuanced approach of the test Desiderata as compared to simply stating "strive for unchanging tests."
Your perspective on controllability brings to mind the interplay between data and interface. It seems to me that if a data structure already adequately abstracts the underlying dependencies, it could serve as the ideal point of balance between abstraction and concreteness, thereby enhancing controllability. However, in the absence of such a data structure, relying on an interface might be the necessary course of action.
In your experience, what are some guiding principles or considerations when deciding between data and interface for enhancing controllability?