問題描述
設計和建築有什麼區別？ (What is the difference between Design and Architecture?)
These two terms are very diffused. How exactly do they differ?
Is there any real life example or scenario that can elaborate this difference?
‑‑‑‑‑
參考解法
方法 1:
See architecture and design.
The software architecture of a program or computing system is the structure or structures of the system, which comprise software components, the externally visible properties of those components, and the relationships between them. [...] Documenting software architecture facilitates communication between stakeholders, documents early decisions about high‑level design, and allows reuse of design components and patterns between projects.
‑‑
Software design is a process of problem‑solving and planning for a software solution. After the purpose and specifications of software are determined, software developers will design or employ designers to develop a plan for a solution. It includes low‑level component and algorithm implementation issues as well as the architectural view.
‑‑
So they share parts with each other, but they refer to slightly different aspects of software. Technically speaking, architecture should include all aspects, but in reality they usually refer to high level topology or structure of software. For example, making decision about whether to implement a system as a file‑based command line software, a web app, or an n‑tier rich internet application would be an architectural decision.
Software design includes making architectural decisions, but it would include much deeper ones like how many characters address1 should be in a database, which is not really an architectural decision.
Edit: To simplify the difference, architecture refers to known patterns of software solution, often involving placement and relationships between subcomponents/tiers/layers. The patterns also specify how and where the data is stored, processed, and presented. An architecture is something that could be described using boxes and arrows, such as autonomous robotic paradigms.
The software design is a process of thinking about solutions to the given software requirements. Each problem is unique in its own ways, so design would be different.
方法 2:
In my understanding, design is more specific to one system. Two systems could have a similar design but share the same architecture.
So a design defines how a chosen architecture is applied to the given requirements. (or something like this)
But this is more a feeling of mine, so I'm interested in other answers ...
方法 3:
Think of it this way: for building a house, you get a blueprint from architect (Architect). Then constructor use this blueprint and makes decision (Designer) on how many columns are required what kind of cement and bricks to use, what type of coloring needs to be done etc. These are design decision. Then worker takes order from builder and construct the house (Coder).
方法 4:
my take on this..
Design is the process of planning how you're going to structure your software
Architecture is the reality of how your codebase is structured. If your code is not structured you can't really claim to have an architecture.
Ideally you'd get your architecture from a design phase (or series of design periods during a codebases lifetime), but sometimes good architecture can come from continuous incremental improvements from refactoring, and just a sense of doing what is 'right'.
These aren't formally defined words though ;)
方法 5:
Architecture means the conceptual structure and logical organization of a computer or computer‑based system.
Design means a plan or drawing produced to show the look and function or workings of a system or an object before it is made.
If you are “architecting” a component, you are defining how it behaves in the larger system. If you are “designing” the same component, you are defining how it behaves internally.
All architecture is design but NOT all design is architecture.
How part is the Design and the intersection of What and How is Architecture
There are also design decisions, that are not architecturally significant, i.e. does not belongs to the architecture branch of design. For example, some component’s internal design decisions, like‑ choice of algorithm, selection of data structure etc. Any design decision, which isn’t visible outside of its component boundary is a component’s internal design and is non‑architectural. These are the design decisions a system architect would leave on module designer’s discretion or the implementation team as long as their design don’t break the architectural constraints imposed by the system level architecture.
The link that gives a good analogy
(by g.revolution、Eugene Yokota、MartinStettner、Datta Rooyikar、user83642、TryinHard)