Talk:Code refactoring: Difference between revisions

Revision as of 08:01, 9 July 2009

Revision as of 08:08, 9 July 2009

Line 32:

:::I know this is an old discussion, but just in case anyone's still interested, the earliest use of the term "factorization" (or at least a related term) to refer to splitting responsibilities of code between different modules that I'm aware of was by [[Edsger Dijkstra]] in his 1972 Turing Award Lecture; he used the term "well-factored" on a number of occasions to describe software that adhered to good design principles. Quite clearly, he was not talking about object-oriented systems at the time. [[User:JulesH|JulesH]] ([[User talk:JulesH|talk]]) 16:01, 26 March 2009 (UTC)

:::Thank you guys! But CompSci doesn't use language as other sciences or tech spheres. One might have wished that at the very least the terminology would have be coordinated towards maths, engineering and itself, but consider CompSci "vector" vs. Math "vector", CompSci C++ "method" vs. general engineering and science "method" and CompSci "method" for that part, CompSci "factorization" vs. Math "factorization". Many sciences blather around like deaf fools, but CompSci gives me gooseflesh of horror. ... said: [[User:Rursus|Rursus]] ([[User talk:Rursus|bork²]]) 08:08, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

== Which type of testing ensures that refactoring does not change the behavior of the code ==