Object-Oriented Software Engineering is the title of Jacobson's 1992 book describing a reduced tool-less version of Objectory that was referred to as OOSE. ISBN 0-201-54435-0 To this day I still use OOSE notation when sketching a design,…
…around. The quality of the Lisp and Scheme texts I used, especially SICP, also probably made a difference (the OO texts I used were good, but not as great, with the exception of OOSE (http://www.amazon.com/Object-Oriented-Software-Engineering-A...), but that's as much about great design of your project as well as what the project is making).
……耦合。或者试图让程序员把事情记录下来。我至今还记得当时笑出声来，因为他对他们说了类似“程序员不该把不学无术当成勋章到处炫耀”这样的话。《面向对象软件工程文集》（Essays on Object Oriented Software Engineering）在90年代初是一本好书。
…coupling. Or trying to get programmers to write things down. I still remember laughing when he told them something to the effect of “programmers shouldn’t wear illiteracy as a badge of honor”. Essays on Object Oriented Software Engineering was a good book in the early 90s.
这跟 command pattern（命令模式）不一样，这个概念和名字也不是我编造的。整个 Interactor 的想法直接源自 http://www.amazon.com/Object-Oriented-Software-Engineering-A... ，Uncle Bob 的很多演讲也都是以它为基础的。
It's different than the command pattern, and I didn't make up the idea or the name. The whole idea of the Interactor came straight from http://www.amazon.com/Object-Oriented-Software-Engineering-A... which Uncle Bob bases a lot of his talk on.
……来自分析模型的类（Classes）可能会发生变异，甚至完全消失。我认为这种物化（reification）形式与经典 OOD（例如《面向对象软件工程：用例驱动方法》（Object Oriented Software Engineering: A Use Case Driven Approach））中该术语的用法更为契合，不过我猜大家的经验可能会有分歧。这是一种必须仔细推敲的“合适的抽象层”，而不是随随便便就放一个对象上去，只因为它……
…Classes that came from the analysis model may mutate or even disappear entirely. This is the form of reification that I believe is more closely associated with how the term is used in classical OOD (f.e. Object Oriented Software Engineering: A Use Case Driven Approach), but I suppose people’s experiences may disagree. This is a kind of “right layer of abstraction” that has to be pontificated and not just put down as an object because it’s…
《面向对象软件工程》（Object-Oriented Software Engineering）是雅各布森（Jacobson）1992年出版的一本书的书名，书中介绍了一个无工具支持的精简版 Objectory，被称为 OOSE。ISBN 0-201-54435-0。直到今天，我在草拟设计时依然在使用 OOSE 记号法，……
Object-Oriented Software Engineering is the title of Jacobson's 1992 book describing a reduced tool-less version of Objectory that was referred to as OOSE. ISBN 0-201-54435-0 To this day I still use OOSE notation when sketching a design,…
……周围。我学过的高质量 Lisp 和 Scheme 教材（尤其是 SICP）可能也起到了很大作用（我用过的 OO 教材虽然不错，但没那么惊艳，除了 OOSE (http://www.amazon.com/Object-Oriented-Software-Engineering-A...)，但那更多是关乎项目的优秀架构设计以及项目本身在构建什么）。
…around. The quality of the Lisp and Scheme texts I used, especially SICP, also probably made a difference (the OO texts I used were good, but not as great, with the exception of OOSE (http://www.amazon.com/Object-Oriented-Software-Engineering-A...), but that's as much about great design of your project as well as what the project is making).
……耦合。或者试图让程序员把事情记录下来。我至今还记得当时笑出声来，因为他对他们说了类似“程序员不该把不学无术当成勋章到处炫耀”这样的话。《面向对象软件工程文集》（Essays on Object Oriented Software Engineering）在90年代初是一本好书。
…coupling. Or trying to get programmers to write things down. I still remember laughing when he told them something to the effect of “programmers shouldn’t wear illiteracy as a badge of honor”. Essays on Object Oriented Software Engineering was a good book in the early 90s.
这跟 command pattern（命令模式）不一样，这个概念和名字也不是我编造的。整个 Interactor 的想法直接源自 http://www.amazon.com/Object-Oriented-Software-Engineering-A... ，Uncle Bob 的很多演讲也都是以它为基础的。
It's different than the command pattern, and I didn't make up the idea or the name. The whole idea of the Interactor came straight from http://www.amazon.com/Object-Oriented-Software-Engineering-A... which Uncle Bob bases a lot of his talk on.
……来自分析模型的类（Classes）可能会发生变异，甚至完全消失。我认为这种物化（reification）形式与经典 OOD（例如《面向对象软件工程：用例驱动方法》（Object Oriented Software Engineering: A Use Case Driven Approach））中该术语的用法更为契合，不过我猜大家的经验可能会有分歧。这是一种必须仔细推敲的“合适的抽象层”，而不是随随便便就放一个对象上去，只因为它……
…Classes that came from the analysis model may mutate or even disappear entirely. This is the form of reification that I believe is more closely associated with how the term is used in classical OOD (f.e. Object Oriented Software Engineering: A Use Case Driven Approach), but I suppose people’s experiences may disagree. This is a kind of “right layer of abstraction” that has to be pontificated and not just put down as an object because it’s…