Skip to main content

Refactoring a Demo

I love refactoring code. Moreover, I think refactoring can also be used when looking at software demos.

I love looking at a piece of code that works (for the most part) but just doesn't feel right and taking it apart and putting it back together so that it makes more sense, not just for me but for the next person who comes along.

I find it funny that refactoring and unit testing come from the same core concepts (Agile) because if done correctly, code that was properly unit tested SHOULD result in code that is pretty well-written and refactor-proof. (I'm no expert on the philosophies behind this so please comment and rip this post to shreds)

So refactoring really comes into places where you've got unwieldy code (or worse, legacy code) that no one really can wrap their head around. By the time you've finished refactoring, you possibly COULD have some ways of unit testing it (if you were able to separate each logical piece out).

So how does this apply to demos?

Depending on who is giving the demonstration, a demo will consist of the following:

a) overview of features
b) description of benefits
c) demonstration of functionality
d) explanation of functionality
e) review of benefits / explanation of results
and possibly
f) showing of additional features

The actual content differs by person:
If a sales person gives a demo, it likely goes a->b->e.
A sales engineer: a->c->f->b (possibly e)
A developer: a->c->f->d (and sometimes you don't even need a)
A trainer: a->d->c
A trained user: c

If you want to really look at a valuable demonstration, why not refactor each piece of the demonstration asking the following questions (in this order):

1. What benefit are you trying to show?
2. What feature showcases this benefit the best? *
3. What is the bare minimum I can show to highlight this feature?
4. Is the result obvious?

* If more than one feature gives this benefit "best", then you may want to rethink the design.

How does this relate to refactoring code? Re-ask the questions, thinking about code:

1. What is this block of code supposed to do?
2. How could I rename this to make it easier for others to understand?
3. Have I made this as simple a call as possible for this function to run?
4. Is the result obvious to the calling program?

Development and sales departments almost invariably have a love/hate relationship. Turning some of the questions that are asked in both groups around to match the other's parlance might make a love-fest possible.

Are there any other areas that might benefit from "refactoring"?

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Elevating Project Specifications with Three Insightful ChatGPT Prompts

For developers and testers, ChatGPT, the freely accessible tool from OpenAI, is game-changing. If you want to learn a new programming language, ask for samples or have it convert your existing code. This can be done in Visual Studio Code (using GitHub CoPilot) or directly in the ChatGPT app or web site.  If you’re a tester, ChatGPT can write a test spec or actual test code (if you use Jest or Cypress) based on existing code, copied and pasted into the input area. But ChatGPT can be of huge value for analysts (whether system or business) who need to validate their needs. There’s often a disconnect between developers and analysts. Analysts complain that developers don’t build what they asked for or ask too many questions. Developers complain that analysts haven’t thought of obvious things. In these situations, ChatGPT can be a great intermediary. At its worst, it forces you to think about and then discount obvious issues. At best, it clarifies the needs into documented requirements. ...
Post a Comment
Read more

Respect

Respect is something humans give to each other through personal connection. It’s the bond that forms when we recognize something—or someone—as significant, relatable, or worthy of care. This connection doesn’t have to be limited to people. There was an  article  recently that described the differing attitudes towards AI tools such as ChatGPT and Google Gemini (formerly Bard). Some people treat them like a standard search while others form a sort of personal relationship — being courteous, saying “please” and “thank you”. Occasionally, people share extra details unrelated to their question, like, ‘I’m going to a wedding. What flower goes well with a tuxedo?’ Does an AI “care” how you respond to it? Of course not — it reflects the patterns it’s trained on. Yet our interaction shapes how these tools evolve, and that influence is something we should take seriously. Most of us have all expressed frustration when an AI “hallucinates”. Real or not, the larger issue is that we have hi...
Post a Comment
Read more

When A Machine Starts To Care

“Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic.” Arthur C. Clarke (1962)  I first used that quote when I was starting out in the tech industry. Back then, it was a way to illustrate just how fast and powerful computers had become. Querying large datasets in seconds felt magical—at least to those who didn’t build them.  Today, we’re facing something even more extraordinary. Large Language Models (LLMs) can now carry on conversations that approach human-level fluency. Clarke’s quote applies again. And just as importantly, many researchers argue that LLMs meet—or at least brush up against—the criteria of the Turing Test.  We tend to criticize LLMs for their “hallucinations,” their sometimes-confident inaccuracies. But let’s be honest: we also complain when our friends misremember facts or recount things inaccurately. This doesn’t excuse LLMs—it simply highlights that the behavior isn’t entirely alien. In some ways, it mirrors our own cognitive limits....
Post a Comment
Read more