Talk:Design Patterns

Consider Renaming Article

Can we consider renaming the article to "Design Patterns: Elements of Reusable Object-Oriented Software"? Nonnb (talk) 10:52, 12 January 2011 (UTC)

• I agree, this name is highly ambiguous - Ben - 30 March 2011, 10:46 (CET) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.97.80.11 (talk) 08:47, 30 March 2011 (UTC)

No coverage of scorn

The article doesn't appear to include any criticisms of the book or the approach to design patterns. I've only ever heard reference to the book in contexts where the speakers lambast followers and readers who indiscriminately champion and adhere to the patterns, with specific disdain heaped upon the book having introduced a significant amount of jargon. A few ex-Netscape folks, for example, don't seem to think very highly of the book (or perhaps just its detrimental effects on software engineering in the 1990s). -- C. A. Russell (talk) 06:20, 30 December 2010 (UTC)

Agreed, the article sounds biased towards the book content. I, myself, disagree with some of patterns and the fluffy code they stimulate. Bestsss (talk) 12:33, 19 December 2011 (UTC)