I suspect that many of you are familiar with the term "hard coding a value" whereby the age of an individual or their location is written into the condition (or action) of a business rule (in this case) as shown below:

if customer.age > 21 and customer.city == 'denver'

then ...

Such coding practices are perfectly expectable provided that the conditional values, age and city, never change. They become entirely unacceptable if a need for different values could be anticipated. A classic example of where this practice occurred that caused considerable heartache in the IT industry was the Y2K issue where dates were updated using only the last 2 digits of a four digit number because the first 2 digits were hard-coded to 19 i.e. 1998, 1999. All was well provided that the date did not advance to a time beyond the 1900’s since no one could be certain of what would happen when the millennia arrived (2000). A considerably amount of work (albeit boring) and money, approximately $200 billion, went into revising systems by way of software rewrites and computer chip replacements in order to thwart any detrimental outcomes. It is obvious how a simple change or an assumption can have sweeping consequences.

You may wonder what Y2K has to do with Business Rule Management Systems (BRMS). Well, what if we considered rules themselves to be hard-coded. If we were to write 100s of rules in Java, .NET or whatever language that only worked for a given scenario or assumption, would that not constitute hard-coded logic? By hard-coded, we obviously mean compiled. For example, if a credit card company has a variety of bonus campaigns, each with their own unique list of rules that may change within a week’s time, what would be the most effective way of writing software to deal with these responsibilities?

Static variables in Python are created as part of the class declaration.  By contrast, instance variables are created as part of a regular method and not a classmethod or staticmethod.

class A:
  i=3  # static variable
	
  def dosomethingregularmethod(self):
       self.k=4   # instance variable
	
# to access static variables


A.i

If you are a software developer looking for a slight change, then you have several options available. The process of software development requires multiple types of resources. A software developer performs the construction and delivery of software programs. An experienced software developer gains business knowledge, analytical skills, team management skills and communication skills. All of these skills can be used to divert your development career into a related and slightly varied role in software development.

Production Support Engineer
A developer can easily switch to the role of a Production Support Engineer. This role entails working with customers and technical teams to report, track and resolve production issues. For some, this might be an exciting opportunity to see the software application from a user’s point of view.

Engineering Manager
If you have experience in leading a team of developers, you could take the role of an Engineering Manager. This role requires managing a bigger team of developers. The Engineering Manager is also responsible for ensuring the delivery of software products and meeting the deadlines set by Product Management. You will get the opportunity to develop software, if you are inclined to do so. However, you will also take new responsibilities such as performance management, infrastructure management and vendor management.

Partner Engineer
This role requires some amount development as well as coordination with partners such as vendors and customers. The job of a Partner Engineer is to act as a middleman to help the integration of services with partners via application programming interfaces (APIs). For example, companies such as Twitter and Facebook employ Partner Engineers to integrate their services with customer websites.

Systems Analyst
Many companies offer developers with an opportunity to switch to Analyst roles. This role involves analyzing system requirements by working with business and technical teams. Many Systems Analysts also work on reviewing, developing and testing application code. This role is suitable for developers with strong analytical skills.

QA Automation Engineer
This role is responsible for automating test cases with the help of tools such as Java, Ruby and Selenium. This role is ideal for people with prior development experience. QA Automation Engineers work with developers and product managers to define test cases, and to automate and run the test cases. In this role, you will get the opportunity to work on back-end as well as front-end automation tasks. You will remain in touch with programming languages as well as database technologies.

Database Analyst
Most people gain significant amount of knowledge on databases while working as a software developer. This will help you to switch your role into a Database Analyst. A Database Analyst analyzes database issues, reviews performance problems, writes database scripts and runs queries. This role also provides a path to become a Database Administrator, if you are interested.

Deployment Engineer
This role is responsible for deploying the code developed by software engineers. You may not be developing application programs in this role. However, you will be responsible for code deployments, pushing the code into test and production environments.

Related:

Surprising Ways Viruses, Malware, Etc. are Infecting Computers

What is the most pressing problem in Project Management for a Software Project Manager?

Being treated like a twelve year old at work by a Tasmanian-devil-manager and not sure what to do about it? It is simply a well-known fact that no one likes to be micro managed. Not only do they not like to be micro managed, but tend to quit for this very reason. Unfortunately the percentage of people leaving their jobs for this reason is higher that you would imagine. Recently, an employee retention report conducted by TINYpulse, an employee engagement firm, surveyed 400 full-time U.S. employees concluded that, "supervisors can make or break employee retention."

As companies mature, their ability to manage can be significant to their bottom line as employee morale, high staff turnover and the cost of training new employees can easily reduce productivity and consequently client satisfaction.  In many cases, there is a thin line between effective managing and micro managing practices. Most managers avoid micro managing their employees. However, a decent percentage of them have yet to find effective ways to get the most of their co-workers.  They trap themselves by disempowering people's ability to do their work when they hover over them and create an unpleasant working environment. This behavior may come in the form of incessant emailing, everything having to be done a certain way (their way), desk hovering, and a need to control every part of an enterprise, no matter how small.

Superimpose the micro manager into the popular practice of Agile-SCRUM methodology and you can imagine the creative ways they can monitor everything in a team, situation, or place. Although, not always a bad thing, excessive control, can lead to burnout of managers and teams alike.  As predicted, agile project management has become increasingly popular in the last couple of decades in project planning, particularly in software development.  Agile methodology when put into practice, especially in IT, can mean releasing faster functional software than with the traditional development methods. When done right, it enables users to get some of the business benefits of the new software faster as well as enabling the software team to get rapid feedback on the software's scope and direction.

Despite its advantages, most organizations have not been able to go “all agile” at once. Rather, some experiment with their own interpretation of agile when transitioning.  A purist approach for instance, can lead to an unnecessarily high agile project failure, especially for those that rely on tight controls, rigid structures and cost-benefit analysis.  As an example, a premature and rather rapid replacement of traditional development without fully understating the implications of the changeover process or job roles within the project results in failure for many organizations.