C ++和设计认证 [英] C++ and Design certification
问题描述
我已经在C ++工作了一段时间了，我想我有一个
设计的天赋（这可能只是我的想象力 -
拉伸.. :)）。所以，我试图找到一个设计认证，可能是涉及C ++的
，但是，如果不是，那就是C ++和UML。我所能找到的只是Java
+ UML设计认证（其中一个详细介绍
http://www.objectsbydesign.com/tools...fication.html) 。虽然UML
预计与语言无关，但如果认证本身是Java + UML，那么我不能指望能够通过它，因为我只是一个
Java初学者。
是否有任何考试/认证可以评估一个人的设计
面向对象设计的能力语言或设计
$ c $ b C ++能力？
提前致谢，
Neel。
Hi,
I have been working on C++ for some time now, and I think I have a
flair for design (which just might be only my imagination over-
stretched.. :) ). So, I tried to find a design certification, possibly
that involves C++, but, if not, C++ and UML. All I could find was Java
+ UML design certifications (one such is detailed on
http://www.objectsbydesign.com/tools...fication.html). Although UML
is expected to be language independent, if the certification itself is
Java + UML, I cannot expect to be able to pass it since I am only a
beginner in Java.
Is there any exam/certification which evaluates one''s design
capability in object oriented design without any language or design
capability in C++?
Thanks in advance,
Neel.
推荐答案
* ne*******@rediffmail.com ：
我已经在C ++工作了一段时间了，我想我有一个
的设计天赋（这可能只是我的想象力 -
拉伸.. :)）。所以，我试图找到一个设计认证，可能是涉及C ++的
，但是，如果不是，那就是C ++和UML。我所能找到的只是Java
+ UML设计认证（其中一个详细介绍
http://www.objectsbydesign.com/tools...fication.html) 。虽然UML
预计与语言无关，但如果认证本身是Java + UML，那么我不能指望能够通过它，因为我只是一个
Java初学者。
是否有任何考试/认证可以评估一个人的设计
面向对象设计的能力语言或设计
C ++中的
功能？
Hi,
I have been working on C++ for some time now, and I think I have a
flair for design (which just might be only my imagination over-
stretched.. :) ). So, I tried to find a design certification, possibly
that involves C++, but, if not, C++ and UML. All I could find was Java
+ UML design certifications (one such is detailed on
http://www.objectsbydesign.com/tools...fication.html). Although UML
is expected to be language independent, if the certification itself is
Java + UML, I cannot expect to be able to pass it since I am only a
beginner in Java.
Is there any exam/certification which evaluates one''s design
capability in object oriented design without any language or design
capability in C++?
我不知道一个。任何现有的都是虚假的，就是说你和其他人在评估你的设计技巧时会说谎。设计是智能的应用，并且判断结果是一个问题
看看设计是否在实际使用中起作用，而不是
至少，wrt。维护，这是不可能通过考试完成的，除非
说这个或那个设计真的很明显很糟糕。
很少有任何单一的权利甚至是对设计问题的正确答案，
虽然有无数明显错误的答案。
如果你发现设计很有趣，那就很好：用C ++编程是关于设计的。所以，如果你认为你有C ++设计的天赋，那么你真的认为你有一个C ++编程的天赋。根据你上面提到的内容，你应该问的问题是b / b
你是否在UML级别比在C ++代码上更开心
/>
等级;如果是这样的话，可能是你在欺骗自己，但是如果你也很高兴在C ++代码级别，并且可以随意切换，将其转换为
另一个毫不费力地在你的脑海中，那么你可能没有错。
关于用C ++编程就是关于设计：阅读什么，例如
类似Modern C ++ Design的书籍。都是关于。他们95％左右的C ++
代码。大部分设计都是考虑到C ++代码
安全性，效率，可移植性，可维护性等等，而不是最低限度，C ++代码清晰度 - 最大化，你有一个好的设计。
-
答：因为它弄乱了人们通常阅读文字的顺序。
问：为什么这么糟糕？
A：热门发布。
问：usenet和电子邮件中最烦人的事情是什么？
I don''t know of one. Any existing one would be bogus, in the sense of
lying to you and others about evaluating your design skills. Design is
the application of intelligence, and judging the result(s) is a matter
of seeing whether the design stands up in actual usage and, not the
least, wrt. maintenance, and that can''t be done via an exam, except to
say that this or that design really and obviously sucks. There is
seldom any single right or even right answer to a design question,
although there are an infinity of clearly wrong answers.
If you find design interesting, then that''s good: programming in C++ is
all about design. So if you think you have a flair for C++ design, then
you''re really thinking you have a flair for C++ programming. The
question you should be asking, given what you mention above, is then
whether you''re far more happy at the UML level than at the C++ code
level; for if so, it may be you''re deluding yourself, but if you''re also
happy at the C++ code level, and can switch at will, translating one to
the other effortlessly in your mind, then you''re probably not mistaken.
About "programming in C++ is all about design": read up on what e.g.
books like "Modern C++ Design" are all about. They''re 95% about C++
code. Much of the design is driven by considerations of C++ code
safety, efficiency, portability, maintainability, and so forth, and not
the least, C++ code clarity -- maximize, and you have a good design.
--
A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
Q: Why is it such a bad thing?
A: Top-posting.
Q: What is the most annoying thing on usenet and in e-mail?
5月22日上午6:36，Alf P. Steinbach < a ... @ start.nowrote：
On May 22, 6:36 am, "Alf P. Steinbach" <a...@start.nowrote:
* neelsm ... @ rediffmail.com：
* neelsm...@rediffmail.com:
我一直在研究C ++已经有一段时间了，我觉得我有一个
的设计天赋（可能只是我的想象力超过
拉伸.. :)）。所以，我试图找到一个设计认证，可能是涉及C ++的
，但是，如果不是，那就是C ++和UML。我所能找到的只是Java
+ UML设计认证（其中一个详细介绍
http://www.objectsbydesign.com/tools...fication.html) 。虽然UML
预计与语言无关，但如果认证本身是Java + UML，那么我不能指望能够通过它，因为我只是一个
Java初学者。
I have been working on C++ for some time now, and I think I have a
flair for design (which just might be only my imagination over-
stretched.. :) ). So, I tried to find a design certification, possibly
that involves C++, but, if not, C++ and UML. All I could find was Java
+ UML design certifications (one such is detailed on
http://www.objectsbydesign.com/tools...fication.html). Although UML
is expected to be language independent, if the certification itself is
Java + UML, I cannot expect to be able to pass it since I am only a
beginner in Java.
是否有任何考试/认证评估一个人的设计
面向对象设计的能力，没有任何语言或设计
$ C $ b C ++的能力？
Is there any exam/certification which evaluates one''s design
capability in object oriented design without any language or design
capability in C++?
我不知道一个。任何现有的都是虚假的，就是说你和其他人在评估你的设计技巧时会说谎。设计是智能的应用，并且判断结果是一个问题
看看设计是否在实际使用中起作用，而不是
至少，wrt。维护，这是不可能通过考试完成的，除非
说这个或那个设计真的很明显很糟糕。
很少有任何单一的权利甚至是对设计问题的正确答案，
虽然有无数明显错误的答案。
I don''t know of one. Any existing one would be bogus, in the sense of
lying to you and others about evaluating your design skills. Design is
the application of intelligence, and judging the result(s) is a matter
of seeing whether the design stands up in actual usage and, not the
least, wrt. maintenance, and that can''t be done via an exam, except to
say that this or that design really and obviously sucks. There is
seldom any single right or even right answer to a design question,
although there are an infinity of clearly wrong answers.
预先评估设计的某些方面
是可能的。即使认证仅适用于
消除完全无能，也会有用。
（一般来说，从我所看到的，这样的认证只能起作用<消除那些不愿意或无法支付费用的人。
真的不是有用的标准。）
It''s possible to evaluate certain aspects of a design
beforehand. And even if the certification only worked to
eliminate the totally incompetent, it would be useful.
(Generally, from what I''ve seen, such certification only works
to eliminate those not willing or able to pay the fees. Which
really isn''t a useful criteria.)
如果你发现设计很有趣，那就很好：用C ++编程是关于设计的。所以，如果你认为你有C ++设计的天赋，那么你真的认为你有一个C ++编程的天赋。根据你上面提到的内容，你应该问的问题是b / b
你是否在UML级别比在C ++代码上更开心
/>
等级;如果是这样的话，可能是你在欺骗自己，但是如果你也很高兴在C ++代码级别，并且可以随意切换，将其转换为
另一个毫不费力地在你的脑海中，那么你可能没有错。
If you find design interesting, then that''s good: programming in C++ is
all about design. So if you think you have a flair for C++ design, then
you''re really thinking you have a flair for C++ programming. The
question you should be asking, given what you mention above, is then
whether you''re far more happy at the UML level than at the C++ code
level; for if so, it may be you''re deluding yourself, but if you''re also
happy at the C++ code level, and can switch at will, translating one to
the other effortlessly in your mind, then you''re probably not mistaken.
UML和C ++相互补充，我绝不会开始编写应用程序而没有完成某些设计（在UML中）
优先。 C ++首先是和实现工具，而不是
a设计工具。
UML and C++ complement each other, and I would never start
coding an application without having done some design (in UML)
first. C++ is, first and foremost, and implementation tool, not
a design tool.
关于用C ++编程是关于设计的。 ：阅读像现代C ++设计这样的书，例如
书。都是关于。
About "programming in C++ is all about design": read up on what e.g.
books like "Modern C++ Design" are all about.
关于唯一的设计在现代C ++设计中在标题中。
这本书主要是关于实现技术;任何设计
考虑因素仅限于低级别界面设计，或
特定组件的详细设计。总之，C ++设计和
不是应用程序设计。 （例如，如何设计共享指针，
但不能何时使用它。）
About the only "design" in "Modern C++ Design" is in the title.
The book is mainly about implementation techniques; any design
considerations are limited to low level interface design, or
detailed design of specific components. C++ design, in sum, and
not application design. (E.g. how to design a shared pointer,
but not when to use one.)
他们是95％关于C ++代码。很多设计是由对C ++代码安全性，效率，可移植性，
可维护性等等的考虑因素驱动的，而且至少是C ++代码
清晰度 - 最大化，你有一个好的设计。
They''re 95% about C++ code. Much of the design is driven by
considerations of C++ code safety, efficiency, portability,
maintainability, and so forth, and not the least, C++ code
clarity -- maximize, and you have a good design.
首先需要高级设计。
-
James Kanze（GABI软件） ）电子邮件：ja ********* @ gmail.com
Conseils eninformatiqueorientéeobjet/
Beratung in objektorientierter Datenverarbeitung
9地点Sémard，78210 St.-Cyr-l''coco，法国，+ 33（0）1 30 23 00 34
You need high level design first.
--
James Kanze (GABI Software) email:ja*********@gmail.com
Conseils en informatique orientée objet/
Beratung in objektorientierter Datenverarbeitung
9 place Sémard, 78210 St.-Cyr-l''école, France, +33 (0)1 30 23 00 34
* James Kanze ：
* James Kanze:
>
UML和C ++相互补充，我永远不会开始编码应用程序
没有做过一些设计（用UML）
。
>
UML and C++ complement each other, and I would never start
coding an application without having done some design (in UML)
first.
我不喜欢UML被滥用的方式因为符合标准符号的符合
的想法是直接冲突需要
表达更高级别的概念，因为它是一种不妥协的好处
（U是Booch符号和其他两个人的统一名字
现在逃避我）。此外，工具支持仍然非常差，或者工具（例如Rational Rose许可证）并不是很便宜。但是，一些类似UML的插图，以及从代码生成的UML，
有时候会很好。
I don''t like the way UML is abused because the idea of a conforming
rigidly to a standard notation is in direct conflict with the need to
express higher level concepts, and because it''s an ungood compromise
(the "U" is the unification of Booch notation and two others whose names
escape me right now). Also, the tool support is still very poor, or
alternatively, tools (e.g. Rational Rose licenses) are not exactly
cheap. But, some UML-like illustrations, and UML generated from code,
can sometimes be nice.
C ++是，首先，和实施工具，而不是
a设计工具。
C++ is, first and foremost, and implementation tool, not
a design tool.
取决于您的设计意味着什么。
纯度设计有很多层次和色调。并且设计绝对不需要仅通过基于UML的工具创建带注释的图形（限制自己这样的方式就像在开始工作之前穿上一件紧身衣一样） 。
Depends what you mean by design. There are many levels and shades of
purity of design. And design does absolutely not need to be only
annotated graphics created via an UML-based tool (limiting oneself that
way would be like donning a straightjacket before starting the job).
>关于用C ++编程就是关于设计：阅读例如
>About "programming in C++ is all about design": read up on what e.g.
books like "Modern C++ Design" are all about.
关于唯一的设计在现代C ++设计中在标题中。
About the only "design" in "Modern C++ Design" is in the title.
我认为安德烈会不同意，因为大概是他选择了这个头衔...... ;-)
I think Andrei would disagree, since presumably he chose the title... ;-)
这本书主要是关于实施技术;任何设计
考虑因素仅限于低级别界面设计，或
特定组件的详细设计。总之，C ++设计和
不是应用程序设计。 （例如如何设计一个共享指针，
但不能何时使用它。）
The book is mainly about implementation techniques; any design
considerations are limited to low level interface design, or
detailed design of specific components. C++ design, in sum, and
not application design. (E.g. how to design a shared pointer,
but not when to use one.)
>他们是95％左右C ++代码。很多设计都是由对C ++代码安全性，效率，可移植性，可维护性等的考虑因素驱动的，而且至少，C ++代码的清晰度 - 最大化，并且你有一个好的设计。
>They''re 95% about C++ code. Much of the design is driven by
considerations of C++ code safety, efficiency, portability,
maintainability, and so forth, and not the least, C++ code
clarity -- maximize, and you have a good design.
您首先需要高级设计。
You need high level design first.
有很多级别的设计。 "设计与QUOT;本身就意味着整个
的事情。并不意味着瀑布方法论的一个阶段。
-
答：因为它弄乱了人们通常阅读文本的顺序。 />
问：为什么这么糟糕？
A：热门发布。
问：usenet上最烦人的事情是什么？电子邮件？
There are many levels of design. "Design" by itself means the whole
thing. And does not imply a phase in a waterfall methodology.
--
A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
Q: Why is it such a bad thing?
A: Top-posting.
Q: What is the most annoying thing on usenet and in e-mail?
这篇关于C ++和设计认证的文章就介绍到这了，希望我们推荐的答案对大家有所帮助，也希望大家多多支持IT屋！
