Being explicit about "unsafe" function

Update: I've dropped most of the ideas mentioned here.

I'm toying with the idea of prefixing unsafe functions in swx with unsafe_ (example: unsafe_swx_mapper_match). I like how this makes explicit the fact that I'm testing unsafe functions (example: test_unsafe_swx_mapper_match). This is similar to the use of the exclamation (!) suffix in Scheme and Ruby. If this works well, I might do the same in inertia.

Couple of other things you might notice if you haven't done much programming in PHP are the swx in the function names that acts like a namespace for swx and the underscore (_) prefix in some function names (example: _unsafe_swx_mapper_pattern) that marks them as private functions for internal use only.

Rules-First Programming

From Just Ship, Baby by Kent Beck:

I’ve sneering dubbed this philosophy “Rules-First Programming.” I hope by naming this demon I’ll have power over him the next time he comes to sit on my shoulder. When doing things right becomes more important than doing things at all, I hope to recognize his peculiar smell, an acrid mixture of frustration, sanctimony, cowardice. “Rules First Programming,” I will say, “you better go sit on some other fool’s shoulder today because today I am going to ship.”

Right on!!

Deliver When Done

When I was first introduced to Unit Testing, I didn't like it because it was doing things to my code that I didn't like. Over time I realized that it was my code that was the problem and not the tests. I seem to be in that same place again with wanting to continuously delivery working software without the artificial boundaries of iterations and releases. Where you make very thin slices of your tasks and deliver a slice when its done. Where every commit is also a deploy.

Note to self: Look up incremental development-and-delivery model