From design pattern to Liang sicheng

Design Pattern has become a familiar term in software design. In addition, most people will think of the famous design patterns of gof. As a matter of fact, even though the four authors are Daniel and I have been paying much attention to cutting-edge news, it is still difficult for me to write the names of the four authors by memory. No way. It is so insensitive to foreigners. However, gof is easy to remember.
Gang of Four, the first reaction we saw, F4? F4. At first, I did not agree to translate gof into a four-person group. Why are you doing this! Later, I learned that the gof was translated from four people. It seems that the New China not only outputs such a new word as paper tiger, it turns out that the Gang of Four is also an example. When talking about the Gang of Four, I thought of a poem I had when I was a child:
A bridge on Huangpu River,
The decay of jiangqiao has been shaken.
Please instruct, is it split or burn?
Now, the Huangpu River is no longer in progress, and the new Huangpu River has not collapsed yet. Someone should write new poems to help the new four or five people or something? Maybe New Poetry has been written, but I will not be able to see it.
Let's talk about the design mode.
On Wikipedia, I have a detailed introduction to design pattern, but thanks to g_f_w, I cannot access it at home.
Design pattern is influenced by the architect Christopher's book a pattern language, which introduces the concept of architectural design into software design. This is undoubtedly a pioneering undertaking with far-reaching significance. Architectural design and software design are both large-scale design activities. Large scale, it is impossible to be as artistic as a micro-sculpture or a small design. I think any large-scale design requires something like a pattern. As Kent said, we must realize that building design is more similar than software design, but the two have similarities in some aspects. If the two are the same, they are confused. Everything is built on the architectural model, that is, it is unreasonable. At least for architectural design, construction needs to be considered, and the construction cost is much higher than the design cost. The construction cost of the software is almost 0, which leads us to ignore some Design validation work. For example, a wind tunnel test may be required for the design of large bridges, and Stress Analysis for High-rise Buildings during earthquakes is required. However, the importance of software design cannot be compared with that of architectural design. Both iterative model and test drive reduce the difficulty and cost of quality verification.
Wait, I talked about the half-day design model. What does this have to do with Liang sicheng? It seems that Liang sicheng should think of Lin Huiyin, Xu Zhimo, and Tagore. Or Beijing Old City protection, Japan's Kyoto, Nara or something. What is the relationship with software development? We need to talk about this from the perspective of He weiyun.
Regardless of the comments and comments from everyone, especially the comments "Who told you to be born unfortunately in China" have aroused comments from netizens. I have never looked at the text before and after this sentence, but literally, I can't see the cold blood of the coal miners. It seems a deep sense of sorrow and helplessness. I have also seen a debate on his ethics for clone humans, on the grounds that the twins in the same way are identical and there is no social cognitive problem, clone humans cannot be more similar than twins, so ethical issues can be completely solved. In my opinion, this article is fair. The problem is that a lot of people may still be cloning people, that is, copying the recognition level of the same person. Only genes, ages, knowledge, and social identities can be cloned.
He Xiaoyu also criticized Liang sicheng, who attacked he Xiaoyu accordingly and contacted Liang sicheng's death. I don't know much about this. However, I did find a batch of Liang's article titled Liang sicheng's incorrect opinions on building problems, which was originally published in the tenth issue of the magazine study in 1955. I found this article in the spirit of gossip and professionalism. However, one of the arguments attracted me, the third part is "the so-called 'grammar 'and 'lexical' theory on architecture is a formalistic Theory":
Liang sicheng believes that buildings and languages are the same. A nation always creates a Convention that they love and follow for generations and becomes French. It also believes that there are some processing methods and relationships between components and components, between components and their processing and decoration, between individual buildings and between individual buildings, so we say it is a kind of "grammar" on the building ". As for shards, columns, shards, shards, doors, windows, and so on, it is the "word" on my architecture ", is an indispensable component and factor for building a building or a group of buildings (see the first phase of architecture Journal of 1954 ).
Liang sicheng also inferred from this point of view: "Just as grammar imposes certain constraints on the use of language and text, the use of materials and components is also restrained by the 'Type fan ', 'French', and 'practice. However, under this constraint, there is also a great deal of flexibility in application, can have a diversity of performance ." ("New Construction" No. February 1954) sometimes said: "grammar is sometimes irrational." ("Building the motherland"). Then he came up with a break on the creation of the Chinese national form:
"…… We are not familiar with the 'operation' or 'French 'of our buildings. It seems impossible for us to create a new China building, just as it is impossible to write a Chinese article without learning Chinese words and grammar." (New construction, November February 1954)
Liang sicheng also proposed the theory of building "translability" and thought: "Just like using the same grammar to organize words, we can write very different articles. in architecture, each nation can use its own unique method to flexibly use building materials and components. For different needs, they can create extremely different shapes and create extremely different types, solves extremely different problems and expresses extremely different emotions. The conclusion is that all other nations can be built in their national form, and the other nations cannot be built in their own form ." (Same as above)
Conditional reflection notes that the words "style fan", "French", and "practice" are connected to the building mode. Suddenly, do Liang sicheng and Christopher have any academic origins? Where did Liang sicheng's thoughts come from? I found that Liang sicheng studied at Harvard University for about half a year and studied world architectural history. Kristov earned a doctorate in architecture at Harvard about 30 years later. Unfortunately, I did not find any academic connection between the two. Therefore, the conjecture that the architectural model was inspired by Liang sicheng was just a guess. To prove this, you need to read a lot of Liang and Christopher's papers to make a decision. However, Liang sicheng's idea is not creation, but traceable. On the one hand, although benefiting from its research on the world's architecture, another important source is known as the Great "Create a French" that does not fully understand. Later, he wrote "Create a French note". I have not read this book, but I have read some directories and descriptions. There is already the beginning of the architectural model. The book was written in the Song Dynasty around the park in 1100.
Well, when people brag about it, we can say that the origin of the design model may be in China. Pai_^
In addition, Mr. He's Criticism of Liang, although still within a reasonable range, has no personal attacks. It was just in that age that Mr. He's position at the time had serious consequences. In the eyes of a programmer, Mr. He is not familiar with architectural design because he is an expert in layman's criticism.
Software development and physical observation are two very different processes. The method of physical research is generally a process of discovery. All physical discoveries can be reproduced repeatedly through experiments. For non-experimental ones (such as the day-body physics), they also need to be consolidated through test predictions. Software development is largely a process of creation. That is to say, in terms of "creation", it is bound to be connected with many creative activities. Mode is one of the many similarities. Along with Mr. Liang's ideas, there must be many modes of literary creation. Poetry, words, songs, Fu, and essays are different styles. Different structures are also the mode, and the conversion mode is also the mode. Other art, such as Chinese painting and music. Corresponding to software development, there are analysis, architecture, and design modes. Some people say that the existence of patterns stems from language defects, and some people prove that the 16 patterns in the design patterns book are no longer models in dynamic languages, because they are too simple to be called models. I think that the model is due to a language defect that remains to be discussed. First, there must be a new pattern in the new language. The pattern is not equal to the language price. Strong as natural language, there are also design patterns to adapt to things, rhetoric. Typical examples in Chinese are: comparison, metaphor, anthropomorphic, etc. bixing can be either a design model or an architecture model. Second, the more built-in modes, the weaker the language, rather than the stronger the language. The language should provide a stage for the model, rather than launching the game. The Fisher principle, and the "Bad is good" Creed teach us that such a language is more useful in a specific field and more difficult in other fields. There is a positive correlation between the useful degree and the degree of stenosis.
By comparing software development with other creative activities, we can see that software development has two sides. On the one hand, it is engineering, which is widely accepted. On the other hand, it is artistic. Because software is always bound with business, science, and technology. We are not willing or subconsciously avoiding being connected to art. In fact, we don't have. Creativity is not just a fantasy. Software development does not have to worry about the reputation of art, which means it is as unreliable as a castle in the air. There are also rules to follow in art creation. Art Workers emphasize basic skills as much as programmers require basic skills. Therefore, the work experience of artistic creation, especially large-scale creation, is also worth the reference of software development.
This is what I think of when I understand Liang sicheng.