Andres de Lago | Arquitectura de Software

First things first, I really liked the movie, its plot is a little crazy but the way that all the events in the movie happen and the way they are portrayed I think was very entertaining. As far as accuracy goes, I don’t think they did or even intended to do much about it. There’s clearly a sense of simple-mindedness to how stuff ends up working. Although some parts I believe are very close to what was actually possible with the equipment of the time, most feats are not only impossible but kind of silly. For example, the machine that’s playing the games, that kind of sophistication is far beyond the technology of our time, let alone the time the movie was filmed. And the fact that from playing tic-tac-toe it understands the concept of futility and applies it to another unrelated area is not something that could even be conceived right now, it’s far too human for a machine, even if it’s one that learns. I think this movie tries to show a scary side to computers and tech...

Software architecture is one of those subjects in software engineering that’s still being actively developed and discussed, a testament of just how young computer science and software engineering are compared to other areas of engineering and in general human knowledge. Maybe it’s because of that or because it’s a highly abstract concept even if it wasn’t still discussed, that I’ve always struggled to get a real concrete understanding for what it is. I’ve never gotten past feeling of what it does or how exactly it should be done, and because of that I’ve never really known what to do about it on projects that I’ve been in a position to work like one of the architects. Now, this blog post we read made a great point about It, I really liked the way Martin Fowler, defines it as the significant components and design decisions that agreed upon by the expert developers tasked on a project. It makes things clearer on how to approach doing architectural design and it also hel...

While I was reading this chapter, I found that I already knew or at least had heard of most of the concepts that the author goes through, but I hadn’t seen them all in one single place. I liked that about it, the way it explains software architecture in a practical or at least concise. Having said that, I would expect this book’s target audience to be people that don’t have as much formal education on software engineering as we (all CS students at Tec de Monterrey) do. The reason for that judgement is that it doesn’t go into much detail and just breezes through a bunch of concepts and definitions sort of like it was a reference manual that you could open when you forgot something simple but doesn’t add much to our pretty comprehensive software engineering classes. I mean, we don’t take three or more semesters worth of software engineering subjects to not know this kind of stuff. Maybe it’s an introductory chapter and the author will go into detail later but as it stan...