Sunday, February 27, 2011

On the fence about Java, open source is the shiznit and .NET build automation sucks

I moved to a new team more than half a year ago and at first things were rough.  The team itself was fine but I was giving up my precious C# for Java and I was entering a whole universe of new software.  My technology stack changed from Microsoft branded IDEs to that of the open source crowd.  I was out of my element but I thought, "Hey, time to try something new!".

Let's just get this out of the way; as a language, Java is not aging well.  Certainly not in comparison to C# which is getting updated more frequently with a lot better language niceties.  When .NET rev'ed itself up to v3 it brought along lambdas and extension methods which makes for some really nice, clean code.  This is noticeably absent from Java.  Even the simple act of passing around functions is no where to be seen in Java.  I have to create a full-blown class that implements one method.  It feels like Java is more worried about being pulled from the holy scripture of Design Patterns than it is about making a language that is enjoyable.  Ah, you can pass an anonymous class but it's still waaaay too verbose.

But that's the thing with Java.  It seems like it tries to be as horrifically verbose as possible.  One of the common Java practices is to mark everything final.  You see final everywhere.  Final member variables, final arguments, final variable declaration, final classes, final final final.  You'd wish that they marked things NON-final because there are far fewer instances of that.  Better yet, choose a language where variables are immutable by default.  You end up with a lot of chatty code, which is unfortunate since it's already a static language...you don't want to be known for pushing the envelope on verbosity.  Here's my favorite quote about it,
Whenever I write code in Java I feel like I'm filling out endless forms in triplicate. 
-- Joe Marshall
I can forgive these sins because I've finally been exposed to open source software.  Software built by the community.  For us, by us.  Open source software has a distinctly different flavor to Microsoft software.  Tools load faster.  There's less fluff.  It's more of what you need and less of what you don't need.  If something has a bug, it's fixed quickly and you can get the patch as soon as someone posts it.  You don't have to live with the same crap for years because it just doesn't show up as a priority on Microsoft's radar.  You know, like the "add reference dialog" that has been the bane of our existence since early 2000 that they only recently addressed (sort of).

I was introduced to Maven which is build and dependency management for Java.  For anyone who cares about build automation (and that had better be ALL of you), Maven beats the ever living snot out of anything you can find in .NET.  .NET's build automation story is absolutely abysmal in comparison.  I know some people think Maven is kinda crappy but it's still light years beyond what the .NET crowd has going on.  The only thing that seems to be standardized in .NET is using NAnt (and possibly but incredibly doubtfully, Albacore/Rake).  Here's a simple scenario that is more difficult to do in .NET,

  1. Gather dependencies
  2. Compile code
  3. Run Unit tests
  4. Run Integration tests
  5. Deploy the application
  6. Run smoke tests

Step 1 was always something that was custom to whatever shop you worked at.  This is where someone had to copy third party libraries somewhere your build process could access them (probably a lame network share).  This is a problem that has been solved for years with things like the Maven repository in Java and Gems repository in Ruby.  Maven just does this out of the box.  When you run a build, it will retrieve your dependencies prior to compilation.  There's a project NuGet for .NET that is supposed to alleviate this problem and I admit I haven't tried using it.  I can only hope it gets integrated into another project like Maven for the .NET community.

Steps 2-3 are straight forward (and usually) don't introduce too much pain.  Step 4 usually requires partially constructing the environment of your application which includes databases, web applications and other such "heavy" dependencies.  This is where the open source community trounces .NET.  When I tried automating testing of web applications it required that IIS be installed, that I had the correct users/authentication, that I figure out the mystery of the Web Deploy tools that are anything but intuitive and extremely prejudiced to IIS 6, blah blah blah.  It was a process that required massive manual intervention and implementation.  It's brittle and no company wants to pay for the time it would take to implement that.

With Maven, I just reference the Tomcat web server plugin, tell it to start a web application on the fly, install it, and run it.  It's disgustingly simple to do and it's actually running a very good analog of my production environment.  You don't get Tomcat Home Edition or Tomcat Developer Edition or some other lame neutered version of the web server product (I'm looking at you Cassini web server).  You get the real deal and you get it with only a handful of XML declarations.

Step 5 in .NET has no real public support or method.  It sucks.  Using the same Maven Tomcat plugin I mentioned above, deploying your web application is a breeze.

I don't think I care to carry on describing how immature the state of build automation is in .NET.  Suffice it to say, we .NET devs should stop waiting for Microsoft to make it for us.  It's a glacial development.  There's too much to be learned from the open source software projects.  First lesson, not all .NET projects need to be monetized.  Yes, you can be compensated for your hard work but there are tons of opportunities to do that outside of selling a product.  Embrace your community, have them push the feature list.  We can go from there.

So while I get a lot better developer tools in open source software, it doesn't come without a price.  I'm not impressed with documentation and it's difficult to find the answers you need.  Unless you subscribe to their IRC channel or mailing list, you aren't going to find help from available online content. Sure, it can get you going but once the rubber meets the road you will inevitably hit an issue that doesn't seem to be covered in anything you can find with conventional Google searches.  I've come to loathe all the websites that index mailing lists, jira and java documentation only to provide you with advertisement-laden dead ends.  You'll have to subscribe to a mailing list, post your question and pray that somebody wants to respond to a question they've probably seen a dozen times before.

The open source world isn't perfect but I love the tooling and the low barrier for entry.  If you've been living in the .NET bubble for some time, take a break and try something new.  The worst case is that you recognize ways to make your life easier.

Sunday, October 3, 2010

It was a busy summer

This last summer I spent time getting embedded in a new group at work.  It's been a blast because the group is really enthusiastic about agile development and adopting new and efficient practices.  I've had a chance to practice a lot of the things I've been doing and studying in my free time including acceptance test driven development, NHibernate, ASP.NET MVC 2 and lots more BDD.

There's nothing sweeter than having a greenfield project and I was able to get my hands on one.  I was tasked with building an internal dashboard for some of our back end (Windows) services.  I'm still in .NET land and we're primarily a Microsoft shop so I used a pretty small but flexible stack,

For testing, I tried out doing acceptance test driven development with SpecFlow which is the .NET analog to Ruby's Cucumber.  My unit/integration testing framework of choice is still MSpec.

I took this experience and made a presentation to the company about BDD.  For anyone that's looked around the web at BDD presentations you won't be incredibly surprised by the content.  Lots of the same points are made and I even borrowed the excellent high gear/low gear analogy of ATDD I found in someone else's presentation (I can't remember who :-(...sorry, uncredited person, whomever you are).  You can download it from my dropbox here.

I know I promised an example of doing ATDD and I'd really like to do it.  Now that work is semi-calm I can try to whip something up.  There are tons of other things I want to talk about like the Java codebase I'm working in now, when NOT to unit test, the current .NET craze around CQRS, and other interesting topics swimming around in my head.  

Sunday, June 27, 2010

BDD: Just tell me what the eff it is!

Here's my big problem with BDD...on first blush the only thing you can see of it are the tools used in it for testing and a bunch of acronyms and buzzwords.  You get all these testing frameworks to try to write natural language tests geared to output something your stakeholder can both read and understand.  For a long time, the question still stood for me; what is BDD?  How do you do BDD?  Sure, my tests were now human readable but it still hadn't added up.

For those that don't understand what BDD is and even those that do, I want to walk you through what I've learned over the last year.  I want to give you an alternative narrative to the stuffy version on wikipedia and the dated top ranked Google results which offer breadcrumbs to understanding but didn't give me the clarity I was looking for.

Let's look at the two line summary Dan North gave last year,
BDD is a second-generation, outside-in, pull- based, multiple-stakeholder, multiple-scale, high-automation, agile methodology. It describes a cycle of interactions with well- defined outputs, resulting in the delivery of working, tested software that matters.
Get it?  Neither did I when I first read it.  After doing a lot of research, investigation and experimentation I finally get it.  Now that I do, that two line definition is an excellent summary.  There's a lot of information packed into those sentences.  We won't try to drill into all of that here.  Let's start with the simple building blocks of the BDD process.

It starts with a story


BDD is firmly rooted in the agile universe.  It relies on a lot of the mechanisms and practices you find in agile processes.  The first and most important is the practice of capturing user requirements as stories.  I'm not going to spend time in this post defining what a story is but let's just use an example we can refer to.
In order to build readership of the blog
As a blog reader
I want to leave comments
This is the first step in BDD, the first tangible piece of the process.  Your stakeholder(s) and your agile group develop stories.

Create examples/scenarios


You have your story.  Take that story and imagine (realistic) scenarios of it in practice.  Who it is that generates the scenarios may be multiple people.  Your scenarios are your acceptance criteria.  They tell you when the story is done.

Here are some samples of scenarios based on the above story.  (Remember, for this story, we're in the context of a reader of the blog and their desire to leave comments.)  The scenarios are written using the Given-When-Then format for describing scenarios.
Given a blog entry
When I write a comment
And I submit the comment
Then I should see my comment under the blog post

Given a blog entry
And the blog entry is no longer accepting comments
When I view the blog entry
Then I should not be allowed to write a comment
You can see how there would be numerous scenarios and contexts of users of your application.  When generating your scenarios, you must take them all into account.

You're just about to write code but...AUTOMATION!


Any good development environment should be as automated as (in)humanly as possible.  With a few quick commands/scripts you should be able to build your app, build your DB (if you have one), execute tests, deploy the app, and run it.  The more you have to do manually the harder this whole thing is.

Also, you should be able to run this in isolation on your workstation, if possible.  If your app is sharing a DB with 5 other workstations in your department, chances are you're going to have collisions.  You won't be able to make predictable tests and you'll be stepping on each others' toes.

When you write your code you want to be continuously running tests.  This should be a push-button activity that does not derail you for several minutes.  If it is then analyze what it is that you're doing and see if you can find ways to streamline it.  Either through tooling or through eliminating deficiencies in your testing strategy.

Outside-in: It's time to TDD


In BDD, we do things outside-in.  Meaning, you start at the level of the user's interaction with your application and then you build downwards.  It's a huge shift for a lot of people.  I haven't been doing it for very long but it's not a huge departure if you were already doing TDD.  Most of my difficulty was just learning how to automate UI interactions.

Here is where the rubber (finally) meets the road.  You have a story, you have some scenarios of your story that crystallize your acceptance criteria, and you have an automated development environment that allows you to build and test your app rapidly.

Using the story and scenarios from this blog post, we can write our first lines of code.  But...I'm not going to do that here.  I have a separate blog post (it certainly deserves its own) coming that will walk through the TDD process under the BDD umbrella.  I'll update this post to refer to it once it's done.

In summary

  1. Write user stories
  2. Create scenarios based on the stories
  3. TDD those stories starting at the top level of your application (typically a UI) and keep developing downwards until it's functionally complete
Yes, that's seriously it.  There are methodologies, practices and tools that go inside of it but, at its simplest, that's all you're really doing.  If you're reading about BDD then I have no doubt that you're already aware of most of these topics anyways. 

The mystical cloak of BDD has now been removed!

DISCLAIMER:  This was meant to be a high level, entry level explanation of BDD because I have rarely seen it simplified.  Most information I've found online, the explanation seems to be a deep dive into how to write stories, stakeholder interaction, how DDD dictates the ubiquitous language, how it's the natural evolution of TDD (without ever showing you how!), and a variety of other entirely relevant information.  The problem is that there's a lot of cognitive overload.

In other words, for BDD enthusiasts, or developers in general because we like to be intellectual, don't dog me out and poke holes in my examples.  It's horribly contrived, I readily admit I am still learning these concepts and I don't believe anything I've written is incredibly misleading.

Thursday, June 24, 2010

wtf, with a side order of bbq

Just a blurb; been trying out new technologies and shiny toys. Here's my naive/ignorant take on things:

Been years since Linq hit .NET. Why is the NHibernate criteria API so incredibly non-intuitive and not making a huge move to linq? It's still clinging to the uber-verbose criteria API that, even fluently, makes hardly any sense. Yeah, I tried using Linq2NHibernate too but it was buggy for anything outside of simple selects and joins. I had an inner join that would magically make itself an outer join when I added an orderby clause. Hot tip for NHibernate; ditch the criteria API and just use Linq like all the other cool kids. It's ok to abandon the bizarre RDBMS abstraction that's been created.

I've been spoiled by Ruby. I can't tell you how many times in my day I think, "goddam, why can't I have mixins!?" It would make a lot of things a lot easier/sexier.

Finally, how can there not be a fully automated solution for deploying .NET web apps? I want something that builds the DB, deploys an MVC app and creates one in IIS if it doesn't exist yet. I haven't found anything like that. Granted I haven't looked too much but I didn't find anything with a handful of google searches. This is another area where the other open source community blows .NET out of the water. If I cared, I'd try to make something like this but I don't have the friggin' time.

Finally, finally I am again reminded of how small the open source community is in .NET. Still can't figure out why.

Sunday, May 9, 2010

Here we go again; where is my mind?

Something is itching at my mind and I haven't given it a name or a face yet. Whether I use Ruby, Java, C#, Scala or Javascript, it doesn't matter. They're details. When you go to Facebook do you think "Wow, this really feels like PHP." or when you hit Twitter do you sense the presence of Ruby and Erlang? Not so much. Then what counts here? What is it that matters?

Software is just a means to an end. I'm not in the business of writing code, I'm in the business of creating tools. Software just happens to be the vehicle in which I deliver them. You need a tool that will remind you to call your mother on her birthday? I'll write software that generates email reminders for important dates. Alternatively, I could have created a phone service that would call your home or cell phone as a reminder. Maybe I could create a network of carrier pigeons that did the same. Unfortunate for the pigeon trade and call centers, writing software is a lot cheaper and maintainable. Do you see what I'm getting at though?

It's more about what I'm delivering than it is how I deliver it. And, for me, the "how" is no longer so narrow. I'm not just a .NET developer and I'm more than comfortable stepping outside of the MS world. I've learned a fair number of engineering practices and principles that are language agnostic like DRY, YAGNI and some of SOLID. I can pick things up quickly no matter which language I choose to use. It's satisfying to know that within 2 weeks of reading and practicing, I have a fairly good idea of how I'd do modular development in Ruby and I even grok some of the deeper concepts like Ruby's compositional nature and metaprogramming.

One benefit of this line of thinking is that I'm no longer narrowing my vision to how I build what the customer wants. I have a much broader perspective of the business I'm in. Ultimately, I'm sure 98% of what I make will be a software product but someday there's going to be something that I think of that can be better serviced with a non-software solution. If I'm lucky, nobody else will be doing it and I can make my fortune from it.

What drove me to this whole post is that I'm trying to figure out what I'd like to create with my new found Ruby skillz. It dawned on me that, while Ruby is a blast to use, it's just the details. The hard work is figuring out what the hell I want to bring to the world. What's my product? What's my vision? What do people want? That's the new mental hurdle for me now.

Sunday, May 2, 2010

Ruby is cool, Time for Rails

I've spent the last couple weeks reading about the fine details of Ruby. My first impressions are good. I dig the language. I haven't put it to good use yet though. Mostly just dicking around in IRB and putting some small classes and modules together. I've been using RubyMine and NetBeans but I haven't had any clear winner on a Ruby IDE. Again, I think once I get into actually writing an application I'll have something more to substantial to share in that regard. Or maybe I'll shed my dependencies to a GUI and go all command line...well, let's not go overboard here. One thing at a time.

Now the next thing to check out is Rails. On first blush, I can see where ASP.NET MVC gets its influence. They share a similar DSL and even class/method names are echoed between the two. But, once again, I'm starved for details. I don't have any books on Rails so I may have to shop for one. I'm mostly just putzing around with what I know from ASP.NET MVC. Did I mention that they're close relatives?

Wednesday, April 21, 2010

Playing with Ruby

With the 1.0 release of IronRuby I decided to take a brief detour from my prior game plan of outside-in development . Part of that decision was because I'd wanted to check out Ruby for a while as a dynamic language (I've lived in a stuffy, static world for too long) with a lot of hype around it. Part of it was because most of the cutting edge BDD work is happening in the Ruby space. And the last part is that Ruby is in the .NET space now (at least up to 1.8.6) so the barrier for entry couldn't possibly get any lower. Yeah, I know the IronRuby project has been going on for years and prior to that it was dirt simple to get Ruby running on Windows but whatever. I'm here now.

Last year I did manage to pick up the book Beginning Ruby which I, unfortunately, didn't take a shine to. The first handful of chapters were light on the details of Ruby and deferred it for later chapters that I never got to. But that's also my fault because I'm a reference book kind of guy. I just picked up The Ruby Programming Language the other day which totally itches that scratch.

I've been playing around with the interactive Ruby shell which has been fun. It gives me a chance to take a spin before I do anything serious. Now I'm looking to pick up an IDE. I downloaded NetBeans and RubyMine. I'll post back with impressions on both the language and the tools.