“A pattern is a fully realized form original, or model accepted or proposed for imitation. With patterns, small piecework is standardized into a larger chunk or unit. Patterns become the building blocks for design and construction. Finding and applying patterns indicates progress in a field of human endeavor.”

—  Peter Coad

Source: Object-oriented patterns. (1992), p. 158

Adopted from Wikiquote. Last update June 3, 2021. History

Help us to complete the source, original and additional information

Do you have more details about the quote "A pattern is a fully realized form original, or model accepted or proposed for imitation. With patterns, small piecewor…" by Peter Coad?
Peter Coad photo
Peter Coad 6
American software entrepreneur 1953

Related quotes

“There was a larger pattern
we worked at: they on a big
loom, I with a small needle.”

R.S. Thomas (1913–2000) Welsh poet

"In Context", p. 13
Frequencies (1978)

Christopher Alexander photo
Rollo May photo
Buckminster Fuller photo

“A pattern has an integrity independent of the medium by virtue of which you have received the information that it exists. Each of the chemical elements is a pattern integrity. Each individual is a pattern integrity. The pattern integrity of the human individual is evolutionary and not static.”

Buckminster Fuller (1895–1983) American architect, systems theorist, author, designer, inventor and futurist

Pattern Integrity 505.201 http://www.rwgrayprojects.com/synergetics/s05/p0400.html#505
1970s, Synergetics: Explorations in the Geometry of Thinking (1975), "Synergy" onwards

W. Brian Arthur photo

“Complexity is looking at interacting elements and asking how they form patterns and how the patterns unfold. It’s important to point out that the patterns may never be finished. They’re open-ended. In standard science this hit some things that most scientists have a negative reaction to. Science doesn’t like perpetual novelty.”

W. Brian Arthur (1946) American economist

"Coming from Your Inner Self", Conversation with W. Brian Arthur, Xerox PARC (16 April 1999) http://web.archive.org/web/20071011023150/http://www.dialogonleadership.org/Arthur-1999.html, by Joseph Jaworski, Gary Jusela, C. Otto Scharmer
Context: Complexity theory is really a movement of the sciences. Standard sciences tend to see the world as mechanistic. That sort of science puts things under a finer and finer microscope. In biology the investigations go from classifying organisms to functions of organisms, then organs themselves, then cells, and then organelles, right down to protein and enzymes, metabolic pathways, and DNA. This is finer and finer reductionist thinking.
The movement that started complexity looks in the other direction. It’s asking, how do things assemble themselves? How do patterns emerge from these interacting elements? Complexity is looking at interacting elements and asking how they form patterns and how the patterns unfold. It’s important to point out that the patterns may never be finished. They’re open-ended. In standard science this hit some things that most scientists have a negative reaction to. Science doesn’t like perpetual novelty.

Martin Fowler photo
John D. Barrow photo

“Where there is life there is a pattern, and where there is a pattern there is mathematics.”

John D. Barrow (1952–2020) British scientist

The Artful Universe (1995)
Context: Where there is life there is a pattern, and where there is a pattern there is mathematics. Once that germ of rationality and order exists to turn a chaos into a cosmos, then so does mathematics. There could not be a non-mathematical Universe containing living observers.<!-- Ch. 5, p. 230

Related topics