Conference PaperPDF Available

Student's PLoP Guide: A Pattern Family to Guide Computer Science Students during PLoP Conferences

Authors:

Abstract and Figures

This paper presents a pattern family to help inexperienced students to participate in PLoP conferences. The patterns describe different situations that may occur during a conference, and how the student must act in these cases. Finally, the paper presents how these patterns relate to each other, forming a complete PLoP guide.
Content may be subject to copyright.
Student’s PLoP Guide: A Pattern Family to Guide Computer
Science Students during PLoP Conferences
Daniel Lucrédio1, Eduardo Santana de Almeida2, Alexandre Alvaro2, Vinicius Cardoso
Garcia1, Eduardo Kessler Piveta3
1 Federal University of São Carlos, Computing Department
Rod. Washington Luiz, Km 235, São Carlos/SP, Brazil
P.O Box 676, Zip Code: 13535-905
Phone: + 55-16-260-8232
{lucredio, vinicius}@dc.ufscar.br
2 Federal University of Pernambuco, Recife Center for Advanced Studies and Systems
Av. Professor Luiz Freire, Recife/PE, Brazil
Cidade Universitária, Zip Code: 50740-540
Phone: + 55-81-2126-8430
{esa2, aa2}@cin.ufpe.br
3 Federal University of Santa Catarina, Computing Department
Rod. Washington Luiz, Km 235, São Carlos/SP, Brazil
P.O Box 1212, Florianópolis, Brazil
kessler@inf.ufsc.br
Abstract. This paper presents a pattern family to help inexperienced students
to participate in PLoP conferences. The patterns describe different situations
that may occur during a conference, and how the student must act in these
cases. Finally, the paper presents how these patterns relate to each other,
forming a complete PLoP guide.
Introduction
Currently, software developers have long observed that certain themes recur and endure
across different applications and systems. The emerging interest in patterns represents
an effort to catalog and communicate these themes and motives, to provide handbooks
of proven solutions to common problems. Moreover, part of this interest can be seen
with the consolidation of already existing conferences, such as Pattern Languages of
Copyright © 2004, Daniel Lucrédio, Eduardo Santana de Almeida, Alexandre
Alvaro, Vinicius Cardoso Garcia, Eduardo Kessler Piveta
Permission is granted to copy for the
SugarLoafPLoP 2004 conference.
All other rights reserved.
Programs (PloP) [1], the European Conference on Pattern Languages of Programs
(EuroPLoP) [2], and the sprouting of new ones such as VikingPLoP [3] and
SugarLoafPLop [4].
However, these conferences possess specific features that make them different
from traditional conferences. There is a series of situations in which the student must
act differently, in order to contribute to the process of improving patterns. Thus, how
inexperienced students must behave in such situations?
Normally, during the beginning of the conference, there is a speech to introduce
these situations to inexperienced participants. Since most PLoP conference present the
same ideas (and thus this is a recurrent solution), what they are really describing are
patterns that show how participants must behave in such conferences. In this paper, we
attempt to group these patterns into a family, in order to improve the participation of
nexperienced students.
Three is the number
1. Pattern Name
Three is the number
2. Motivation
To determine if some solution to a problem is a pattern, which should be submitted to a
PLoP conference.
3. Problem
When recurrently developing solutions to problems, one may wonder if the solution is a
pattern that can be catalogued. But how to know if this is indeed a pattern, and not only
a coincidence?
4. Participants
Possible pattern author (s)
5. Solution
Try to apply the solution in three sufficiently distinct situations. If it can be applied
without modification, then it is a pattern and should be catalogued. It is important that
the situations are distinct enough to discard every similarity, and to assure the
applicability to other situations.
6. Consequences
Reuse: Other people may take advantage of the knowledge and experience of a
successful solution, saving effort and time in future developments.
7. Related or Interacting Patterns
After writing a pattern, or a set of patterns, the author submits it to a PLoP conference,
where he will be “shepherded” before the conference.
Be “shepherded” before the conference
1. Pattern Name
Be “shepherded” before the conference
2. Motivation
To help pattern writers, mainly inexperienced ones, in better expressing their ideas into
a pattern description.
3. Problem
To write a pattern requires including all the information that is necessary in order to
make it reusable. However, inexperienced pattern writers often misunderstand the main
concepts of pattern formats, resulting in failure in documenting a possible reusable
solution.
4. Participants
The author (s) of the patterns, which is writing a pattern for a PLoP conference;
A shepherd, who is an experienced pattern writer; and
The conference committee.
5. Solution
Figure 1 illustrates the solution. Initially, the author (s) writes his patterns into a paper,
and submits them to a PLoP conference. The conference committee then chooses a
“shepherd”, who will be responsible for helping the author (s) in improving the paper.
This process, called “shepherding”, consists in the shepherd reading the pattern, and
providing comments to the author, normally via e-mail. The comments aim to correct
some misplaced information, accordance to the used pattern format, and other useful
hints to help the author to improve the pattern1. The author is not obligated to perform
the changes suggested by the shepherd.
1 A pattern language that describes the shepherding process may be seen in [7].
This process is repeated, normally three times, until the shepherd and the author (s)
come to an agreement regarding the paper. Then, if the author (s) thinks that the
shepherd’s comments were important to the paper, he must opt for including him as an
author. The final version of the paper may then be submitted to the conference, where
some referees will analyze it and decide if it will or will not be approved.
Figure 1. Shepherding process.
6. Consequences
After this incremental process, the pattern is improved;
The author increases his knowledge, due to this contact with an expert
(shepherd);
The shepherd increases his knowledge on the paper subject;
There may be some disagreement between the shepherd and the author, due to
divergence of ideas that may arise during the process;
7. Related or Interacting Patterns
The pattern entitled The Language of Shepherding – A Pattern Language for
Shepherds and Sheep [5], explains how shepherds and authors must behave during the
shepherding process. The shepherding process happens after an author(s) wrote a
pattern or patterns, describing a solution that was applied three times in different
situations.
Don’t let this “sheep” thing take over your head
1. Pattern Name
Don’t let this “sheep” thing take over your head
2. Motivation
To better take advantage of the shepherd’s contribution.
3. Problem
Because shepherds are experienced pattern writers, the author (s) of the patterns may let
all the responsibility for the shepherding process to the shepherd alone. If the author (s)
takes this passive attitude, he will not take advantage of the shepherd’s knowledge. This
could result in poor papers, mainly because the shepherd is often not familiar with the
knowledge embedded in the patterns. The paper may end up containing confused
content, mixing up information from the author (s) (core) with information from the
shepherd (format).
Since the shepherd is often an experienced pattern writer, the author may be intimidated
by his critics and suggestions. The opposite may also happen. Since the shepherd is not
the expert, the author (s) may think that his suggestions are not relevant to the content.
4. Participants
The author (s) of the patterns; and
The shepherd.
5. Solution
It is not because the author (s) is only a sheep that he must act like one and be totally
obedient to the shepherd! To take full advantage of the shepherd’s critics and
suggestions, he must actively participate in the process, taking the responsibility also to
his hands. After a set of comments is sent to the author (s), he may take one of these
directions:
- Ignore: Suggestions from the shepherd, even if he is the most famous pattern writer in
the world, are only suggestions. The author is free to ignore them, if he considers that
they are prejudicing the content of the patterns. Of course, this must be informed to the
shepherd in the next interaction;
- Accept: The author recognizes that the shepherd made a good suggestion, and is ready
to adopt it into the paper. However, being a good sheep requires that he fully analyzes
the suggestions prior to its adoption, instead of taking it just because it came from the
shepherd;
- Question: The shepherd may fail to express what he means. In this case, the author (s)
may ask him for further clarification.
6. Consequences
The patterns now involves the expertise from the author (s) (content) and from
the shepherd (format), which increases the possibility of delivering good
patterns;
The author increases his knowledge on pattern writing; and
The shepherd increases his knowledge on that particular field of expertise.
7. Related or Interacting Patterns
Being a good sheep is part of the being “shepherded” before the conference process.
Know why you are here
1. Pattern Name
Know why you are here
2. Motivation
To define when to participate in a PLoP conference.
3. Problem
PLoP conferences are a particular type of conference. It is not a conference where
people go to learn and discuss about new technologies and interesting ideas. A
participant with these objectives may become a little frustrated, and may even disturb
other participants and prejudice the real objective of the conference. Authors might go
to the conference only to have their papers published, instead of really contributing to
the pattern cataloguing process.
4. Participants
PLoP conference participants
5. Solution
Since PLoP conferences aim at discussing patterns, all participants must have this
objective in mind. Authors should not register only to publish papers, and other
participants should not register only to get to know the novelty.
6. Consequences
There is little risk that the conference participants become frustrated; and
All participants contribute to discussing, improving and cataloguing patterns.
7. Related or Interacting Patterns
After registering to the conference, and knowing exactly its objectives, participants,
may better contribute to the patterns, following the moderator’s guidance, reading
before discussing and bringing their home with them.
Bring your home with you
1. Pattern Name
Bring your home with you
2. Motivation
To reduce the distance between the people that are present in the conference.
3. Problem
PLoP conferences are usually international, involving people from different countries,
with different cultures and languages. Added to the fact that they do not know each
other, this cultural difference may cause some distancing between the people and an
excessive formal environment, which is not good for this kind of conference.
4. Participants
All conference participants.
5. Solution
Every participant brings to the conference a gift, that represents his home country or
culture, to exchange with the other participants.
6. Consequences
The participants gets to know each other better;
The conference environment becomes more informal, and the Writers Workshop
sessions flows better.
7. Related or Interacting Patterns
The participants that registered for the conference, and know what they are doing here,
are asked to bring some gift to exchange with each other.
Read Before Discussing
1. Pattern Name
Read Before Discussing
2. Motivation
To allow PLoP participants to better understand the patterns, before the Writers
Workshop session.
3. Problem
During Writers Workshop, the participants must work forward toward the improvement
of the patterns. However, often these participants are unable to formulate productive
comments and good suggestions, mainly because they didn’t read the patterns, or did it
too superficially. There is also the possibility that a participant read the paper a long
time ago, and thus the ideas and suggestions that came up in his mind ended up being
forgotten.
4. Participants
PLoP conference participants
5. Solution
Figure 2 illustrates the solution. In the beginning of the conference, the committee
defines groups of similar patterns. Then, the participants choose which group they will
participate. Of course, if a participant is also an author, he must choose the group into
which his pattern is included. Each group now contains a fixed number of participants,
who will discuss all the patterns in that group, in several sessions. Before each session,
there is a reading time, which is an amount of time reserved for the participants to read
the papers that will be discussed in the session. During the reading time, the participant
reads the pattern, formulating comments and suggestions for the author.
Figure 2. Reading time.
6. Consequences
The participant increases his personal knowledge on the patterns, even those that
belongs to another interest area than his;
The quality of the session is improved, since the participants may use the
reading time to formulate fruitful comments and contribute to the pattern;
By reserving an amount of time exclusively for the reading, there is little risk
that the participant performs a superficial reading;
By reading the patterns just before the sessions, the ideas are still fresh in his
mind, which may result in fruitful suggestions;
There must be an amount of time and space reserved for the reading, during the
conference;
Reading Objective: PLoP conferences normally occur in beautiful places, such
as farms, castles, beaches and so long. Thus, the participants must remember
that the main purpose during this time is to read the pattern, and not sightseeing.
7. Related or Interacting Patterns
The Reading time directly influences the participants when Giving solutions, instead of
problems and not forgetting the good parts during the session.
See also James Coplien’s ReadingJustBeforeReviewing pattern [6], which served as a
basis for read before discussing.
Follow the moderator’s guidance
1. Pattern Name
Follow the moderator’s guidance
2. Motivation
To assure that Writers Workshop sessions flow normally, resulting in productive
comments.
3. Problem
During a discussion on Writers Workshop session, several participants may express
their opinions about a pattern that is being evaluated. However, there is a limited
amount of time to be spent on these sessions. There is a serious risk that the participants
keep excessively discussing a single subject, or that they escape the main goals of the
session, either by over-criticizing a patter, or giving unfruitful comments.
4. Participants
Writers Workshop session moderator; and
The session participants.
5. Solution
During Writers Workshop sessions, one participant will be the moderator, i.e. a person
who is responsible for keeping the discussion productive, and avoiding to exceed the
time. The moderator has the following responsibilities:
To begin, conduct and finish the sessions, introducing the discussion subjects,
instructing the participants on how and when to express their ideas, and
summarizing comments to finish a subject;
To interrupt unproductive discussions, reminding the participants about the
session goals;
To finish a discussion that is taking too long, by asking the participants to
continue the discussion later, after the session;
If a comment is put in the wrong moment, the moderator may also interrupt,
asking for the participant to wait for the right moment.
Preferably, the moderator should be familiarized with PLoP conferences, in order to
better accomplish his responsibilities.
Every participant follows the moderator’s guidance, and thus the session flows without
unfruitful interruptions, with a better chance to improve the patterns.
6. Consequences
The risk of exceeding the time, or escaping from the main session goals during a
discussion is reduced;
The presence of the moderator stimulates the discussion, contributing to the
improvement of the pattern;
There may be some disagreement between the moderator and the participants;
The moderator must be aware of how to stimulate the participants to give their
comments in the right time. If this doesn't happen, the discussion may turn to be
unproductive.
7. Related or Interacting Patterns
The moderator is the person who guides the discussion, asking the author(s) to become
a Fly on the wall. He also drives the participants in Giving solutions, instead of
problems and not forgetting the good parts. After the session, the moderator asks the
author to come down the wall and start clearing his doubts in the end. Finally, he asks
the participants to clap hands, thanking the author.
See also James Coplien’s ModeratorGuidesTheWorkshop pattern [7], which served as
a basis for Follow the moderator’s guidance.
Be a “fly on the wall”
1. Pattern Name
Be a “fly on the wall”
2. Motivation
To allow the pattern writer to obtain a feedback on his pattern, aiming to improve it and
make it more reusable.
3. Problem
A pattern is intended to be reused by any people, possibly not involved in the solutions
that gave origin to the pattern. Therefore, a pattern must be described in a way that all
the needed information is clearly included, and require no further consulting of the
pattern author to fully understand and reuse it.
If during the Writers Workshop the author is present in the discussions, he is tempted to
provide information on the patterns, since he is the expert of the subject. However, if
this happens, it is impossible to know how the pattern would be understood without his
presence, which is probably the situation where the pattern will be applied.
Also, participants may feel uncomfortable in criticizing the patterns in the presence of
the author. This may inhibit possible fruitful comments to arise.
4. Participants
Writers Workshop session moderator;
The pattern author; and
The session participants.
5. Solution
The best way to discover if a pattern is understandable is to allow the writer to watch
other people (preferably unknown) while trying to understand it. This is what “Be a fly
on the wall” tries to achieve. The session starts with the moderator asking for the author
to read a part of his pattern that he considers important, to help other participants to
focus on this part of the pattern. Next, the moderator asks for the author (s) to become a
“fly on the wall”, as shows Figure 3. The author must keep silent, avoid eye contact
with the other participants (and vice-versa), and pay attention to the comments they
make. Then the moderator asks for the participants to start commenting the paper, and
the session begins. During the discussion, the author (s), which must keep silent all the
time, may take notes on the discussion, obtaining the feedback in order to improve his
pattern. In exceptional cases, if the author doesn’t understand some comments and is
totally lost during the discussion, he may immediately ask the participants to clarify
them, or else he may not be able to improve his pattern. The participants must not refer
to the author by his name, but as “the author” instead.
Figure 3. Fly on the wall pattern.
6. Consequences
The author can verify how his pattern would be understood without his
presence;
By not looking into the author's eyes, the participants feel more comfortable to
give comments and suggestions;
The author, not being able to respond to the critics, may feel uncomfortable with
the situation;
If the author doesn’t understand some comment, he may be a little lost during
the discussion. And since he cannot speak and ask for clarification, there is the
risk that his doubts remain unclear until the end of the session.
7. Related or Interacting Patterns
The author becomes a Fly on the wall after the moderator asks it. And since while
being a fly he cannot interact with the participants, the author may have some doubts
that arose during the discussion, which remain unclear. He must then clear his doubts
in the end.
See also James Coplien’s FlyOnTheWall pattern [8], which served as a basis for Be a
fly on the wall.
Give me solutions, instead of problems
1. Pattern Name
Give me solutions, instead of problems
2. Motivation
To provide the author constructive critics and valuable information to his pattern.
3. Problem
During the Writers Workshop, participants are responsible for evaluating a pattern and
giving suggestions to improve it. However, an ill-formulated comment, even with a
good intention, may not contribute to improve the pattern. Excessive critics may even
discourage the author (s) in writing for future PLoP conferences.
4. Participants
The Writers Workshop session Moderator; and
Session participants, excluding the author.
5. Solution
The comments during the Writers Workshop must be formulated in a way that really
contributes to the pattern, instead of just destroying it. Therefore, every critic must be
followed by a suggestion, in order to provide clues for the author to solve the identified
problem.
6. Consequences
The contributions do improve the patterns;
If the participant was unable to think of a suggestion, he cannot critic the
patterns. In this way, the problem could pass unidentified;
7. Related or Interacting Patterns
The participants give contributions according to the directions provided by the
Moderator. The contributions are more fruitful if the participants have read the
patterns before the discussion. And after a contribution is given, other participants may
express agreement, by not being parrots.
See also James Coplien’s SuggestionsForImprovements pattern [9], which served as a
basis for Give me solutions, instead of problems.
Don’t forget the good parts
1. Pattern Name
Don’t forget the good parts
2. Motivation
To avoid only destructive critics to be expressed.
3. Problem
Since the objective of the Writers Workshop is to improve the patterns, the participants
focus mainly on the problems. However, there is also important that the author (s) get to
know which parts of the patterns are good, in order to maintain them in the final
version, or else he could risk discarding it together with the bad parts.
4. Participants
The Writers Workshop session Moderator; and
Session participants, excluding the author.
5. Solution
The moderator asks for the participants to start by expressing the good parts of the
patterns, so these won’t be forgotten and the author (s) may keep them on the final
version of the paper.
6. Consequences
The risk of discarding good parts of the pattern in the final version is reduced;
The author is encouraged in keeping improving his patterns;
7. Related or Interacting Patterns
The participants give contributions according to the directions provided by the
Moderator. The contributions are more fruitful if the participants have read the
patterns before the discussion. And after a contribution is given, other participants may
express agreement, by not being parrots.
See also James Coplien’s PositiveFeedbackFirst pattern [10], which served as a basis
for Don’t forget the good parts.
Don’t be a parrot
1. Pattern Name
Don’t be a parrot
2. Motivation
To express agreement with other participant’s comment.
3. Problem
When discussing a pattern during a Writers Workshop session, several participants may
think in the same way, during a comment or suggestion. Therefore, there is no need for
everyone to repeat the same ideas, since this would take time, which could be spent in
other subjects. Also, with everyone repeating the same ideas, there may be a tendency
to keep the discussion too long or too focused on a single subject, instead of moving on
to other subjects.
4. Participants
The Writers Workshop session moderator; and
Session participants, excluding the author.
5. Solution
Every time a participant wants to express agreement in relation to a comment made by
other participant, instead of repeating the same comment in different words, or saying “I
agree with that”, he may just say a word that express agreement. Usually, this word is
unique inside a PLoP conference, and may vary depending on the local culture or
language. This happens for every comment, of any nature, made during the session.
Figure 4 illustrates this pattern, as it would happen in SugarLoafPLoP, where the used
word is “Gosh”.
Figure 4. Don’t be a parrot.
6. Consequences
The discussion time is reduced; and
The risk of keeping the discussion excessively focused on a same subject is
reduced.
7. Related or Interacting Patterns
After some participant has given a solution, instead of a problem, don’t forgetting the
good parts, other participants may express agreement by not being parrots, avoiding to
keep repeating themselves.
Clear your doubts in the end
1. Pattern Name
Clear your doubts in the end
2. Motivation
To eliminate possible doubts that the author may have after the Writers Workshop
session.
3. Problem
After the Writers Workshop session, the author, which was “the fly on the wall” during
the session, may ask for some clearing about the comments. However, there is a
tendency for the author to “excuse himself”, depending on the comments. This behavior
is discouraged, since it wouldn’t contribute to the pattern, which is the objective of the
session.
4. Participants
Writers Workshop session moderator;
The pattern author (s); and
The session participants.
5. Solution
After the session, the author may ask for some clarifications about the comments and
suggestions that were made during the session, and nothing else. He can’t, for example,
provide further explanation on a subject that wasn’t clearly understood by the
participants, or to present new information that weren’t present in the pattern.
6. Consequences
By clearing his doubts about the comments, the risk of misunderstanding or
confusion is reduced;
Further discussions in the end of the session are eliminated.
7. Related or Interacting Patterns
After being a Fly on the wall, unable to interact with the participants during the session,
the author (s) may start Clearing doubts, after the Moderator asks him to do so.
See also James Coplien’s AuthorAsksForClarification pattern [11], which served as a
basis for Clear your doubts in the end.
Let’s thank the author
1. Pattern Name
Let’s thank the author
2. Motivation
To express acknowledgement to the author(s), for his work on writing the pattern.
3. Problem
In the end of the session, after some time of discussion, especially after some critics, the
author may feel that his work on writing a pattern wasn’t very good, and become a little
depressed.
4. Participants
Writers Workshop session moderator; and
The session participants.
5. Solution
After the session, the moderator asks for the participants to congratulate the author, by
clapping their hands.
6. Consequences
The author feels more confident in himself, knowing that his work has been
acknowledged.
7. Related or Interacting Patterns
After the session, the Moderator asks the participants to clap their hands, congratulating
the author for his work.
See also James Coplien’s ThankTheAuthor pattern [12], which served as a basis for
Let’s thank the author.
Student’s PLoP guide: A Pattern Family to Guide Computer Science Students
during PLoP Conferences
In this section we present how the previous patterns interrelate, providing a full guide
for students to participate in PLoP conferences. Figure 5 shows this relationship.
Figure 5. Pattern family for PLoP conferences.
After a solution is successfully applied three times, the author (s) of the solution writes
it into patterns and submits it to a PLoP conference. Then, he will be “shepherded”
before the conference, but should not let this “sheep” thing take over his head. Then
the conference will begin. Authors and participants should know why they are here, at
the conference. Bringing your home with you is a way to reduce the distance between
people. In the conference, all participants read before discussing, and follow the
moderator’s guidance. During the discussion, the author is a “fly on the wall”, and
watches while other participants give solutions instead of problems and don’t forget
the good parts. None of the participants are parrots, since they do not keep repeating
themselves. After the discussion, the author (s) clears his doubts in the end, and the
moderator asks for the participants: “Let’s thank the author”, and the Writers
Workshop session ends.
Acknowledgements
The authors would like to thank Dana Anthony for the suggestions and improvements
on these patterns. This work is supported by Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado
de São Paulo (FAPESP) – Brazil, and Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado da
Bahia (FAPESB) - Brazil.
References
[1] The 11th Conference on Pattern Languages of Programs (PLoP2004). September 8-
12, 2004, Allterton Park, Monticello, Illinois, USA. (http://hillside.net/plop/2004/)
[2] Ninth European Conference on Pattern Languages of Programs (EuroPLoP2004).
July 7-11, 2004, Irsee, Germany. (http://hillside.net/europlop/)
[3] The Third Nordic Conference on Pattern Languages of Programs
(VikingPLoP2004), September 16-19, 2004, Uppsala, Sweden.
(http://www.plop.dk/vikingplop/)
[4] The Fourth Latin American Conference on Pattern Languages of Programs
(SugarLoafPLoP2004), August 10-13, 2004, Porto das Dunas, Ceará, Brazil.
(http://sugarloafplop2004.ufc.br/)
[5] N. B. Harrison. The Language of Shepherding – A Pattern Language for Shepherds
and Sheep. In PLoP 1999, August 15-18, 1999, Robert Allerton Park and Conference
Center, Urbana, IL, USA.
[6] J. Coplien. ReadingJustBeforeReviewing. In Writers Workshop Patterns. Available
in http://c2.com/cgi/wiki?WritersWorkshopPatterns.
[7] J. Coplien. ModeratorGuidesTheWorkshop. In Writers Workshop Patterns.
Available in http://c2.com/cgi/wiki?WritersWorkshopPatterns.
[8] J. Coplien. FlyOnTheWall. In Writers Workshop Patterns. Available in
http://c2.com/cgi/wiki?WritersWorkshopPatterns.
[9] J. Coplien. SuggestionsForImprovements. In Writers Workshop Patterns. Available
in http://c2.com/cgi/wiki?WritersWorkshopPatterns.
[10] J. Coplien. PositiveFeedbackFirst. In Writers Workshop Patterns. Available in
http://c2.com/cgi/wiki?WritersWorkshopPatterns.
[11] J. Coplien. AuthorAsksForClarification. In Writers Workshop Patterns. Available
in http://c2.com/cgi/wiki?WritersWorkshopPatterns.
[12] J. Coplien. ThankTheAuthor. In Writers Workshop Patterns. Available in
http://c2.com/cgi/wiki?WritersWorkshopPatterns.
... The process of identifying patterns of continuous experimentation has been done in three parts: literature review, brainstorming meetings and application of the pattern "Fly on the wall" [Lucrédio et al. 2004]. ...
Conference Paper
Full-text available
The demand for software application development has grown exponentially in recent years and will certainly continue growing as new programming techniques and patterns are adopted. The development of applications that better adjust to the real needs of the customers is a challenge. Understanding the behavior of users to improve certain points of the software is also not an easy task. Often, this assessment is done by assumptions rather than being based on real data. One of the approaches to understanding the user behavior for software application development is through continuous experimentation. Continuous experimentation aims to obtain information about the behavior and preferences of the users' directly or indirectly through the analysis of the data generated by multiple experiments, in a continuous process and over time. Thus, such process can generate a large amount of data. In this article, we present a set of patterns related to the use continuous experimentation for the continuous improvement of software with a focus on the correct interpretation of data, as well as the most appropriate way of systematizing the process of experimentation of software products and services.
Conference Paper
The process to identify, author, and apply patterns is mostly performed manually by pattern experts. When performing pattern research in large domains involving many persons, the current state of the art of pattern research techniques, such as shepherding and writers' workshops, should be extended to a larger organizational process coordinating the work of all involved participants. This paper presents the process we followed to identify, author, and apply patterns in various domains involving multiple industry partners. Due to the diversity of these domains, we claim that the process is general enough to be applicable in other domains as well. This paper documents this process for use, discussion, further refinement, and evaluation in a larger pattern research community.
AuthorAsksForClarification Available in http
  • J Coplien
J. Coplien. AuthorAsksForClarification. In Writers Workshop Patterns. Available in http://c2.com/cgi/wiki?WritersWorkshopPatterns.