Avoid Common Errors in JavaEE Project Evaluation

Avoid Common Errors in JavaEE project evaluation-Linux general technology-Linux programming and kernel information. The following is a detailed description. Select appropriate candidates for evaluation

In any evaluation process, the first step is also the most important step. What you need to always be clear about is that appropriate candidates, not necessarily the most important ones, are responsible for operational analysis and evaluation. In addition to formal evaluation techniques and knowledge, the candidate should also have the business field knowledge of the project and the technical knowledge used by the project. A non-technical person will never understand what a framework constraint or technical choice means in a real development process.

Consider the availability of technologies, frameworks, and tools recommended for the project

Java EE projects can select different frameworks and tools. Each framework has its own functions, limitations, and learning curves. The effects of these factors are significant after the project enters the development stage. When preparing an evaluation, you should complete the Preliminary Phase Investigation and find out the applicability and impact of these options on the project. These options should be adapted to the current and future training of the team.

Integration with external/third-party systems

In software applications, external system integration is an ever-changing and often underestimated part. More often, there is only one line of statement in the requirement document. The system should use the existing system and API to send/receive data. In particular, this part requires careful verification and validation. Based on the complexity of system details and communication protocols, a lot of subsequent work needs to be included. If the communication details "how and when" with external systems are not available during the evaluation, this part of the evaluation can only be processed as an assumption, it should also be listed as the part that needs to be re-evaluated after the underlying design is complete. Remember, in the real world, there is no plug-and-play.

Consider existing enterprise components

Most organizations already have basic structures of ready-made information systems. Some reusable enterprise components can be used and authorized in new systems. For consistency, compatibility, and savings, the customer always promotes compatibility. However, it is important to note that in order to meet such requirements, the evaluation should include efforts to understand the design of these components and to verify their feasibility in the new system.

For example, a customer may already have a user authentication and authorization framework, but needs to be integrated into the new system. In this case, there is a potential "surprise during running" (usually an error occurs during running ). The reason is that the new business requirements are not implemented by an existing framework, and some enhancements may be required. In addition, if some functions and limitations of the framework are not available at the time of evaluation, this must be assumed to be documented.

Consider existing architecture standards

Considering that the existing standards are another area that is often overlooked in the evaluation and have a significant impact on the work, many additional work can be avoided if the current standards are already in place. But on the other hand, standards can also bring a lot of restrictions in the actual design and implementation process. For example, if you want to obtain the financial information of an enterprise and display it on the screen, you can simply add a terminal area on the screen. However, if the customer already has a document server to manage the customer's financial information in the entire application, it is completely another thing. In this way, you need to establish communication protocols, exception handling, and other standards with the document server. This is a big job. You should put architecture standards and business requirements at the same important position in the evaluation.

Consider the actual test workload

With the development of automated testing tools and frameworks, the actual testing workload is much different from that of the oldest unit tests created and executed in schools. For example, if you want to create and run JUnit test cases, and the traditional unit test method is different, additional development time and learning curve are possible. Therefore, the processing methods tested in the test evaluation need to be clearly indicated to avoid any divergence.

Parallel development of mutual dependencies

When multiple mutually dependent applications are concurrently developed, the situation becomes more variable. If the application depends on ongoing development, it must be marked. The current feasibility should be verified during each communication. Pay special attention to the risk summary for other development projects. For example, an application must display the user's credit details, which must be obtained by calling an enterprise API through an external system. However, this enterprise APIs is being developed by another team, this API should be completed and available during your development project. It takes more time to use basic API calls to test the application and then use actual calls to replace it, the evaluation should clearly and professionally indicate the impact of these dependencies.

Use part-All Handling Methods

In the old saying, "divide and conquer" is the same in software evaluation. Divide the work into small parts and then list the steps to be completed for each small part. In this way, the overall evaluation of each step will be more accurate than the overall evaluation of the entire project.

Conclusion

In today's IT industry, fierce competition for products is completed on time and quality, and accurate evaluation is crucial. Project details that are often ignored will have a significant impact on the evaluation. The points mentioned in this article should be integrated with the mature Evaluation Technology to minimize the possibility of evaluation errors.