We're a small company and we perform many roles, the MD is very hands on which is sometimes a blessing sometimes a curse, so the marketing manager is the sales manager is the salesman.

i find that the question of reuse is really a question of granularity. its all well and nice to write fairly large classes with fairly large methods but the truth is these classes and these methods are brittle even in an OOP design. 3 tier architectures, design patterns, etc allow us to break apart large classes into reusable chunks by separating what already works into more thoughtful pieces (this is the place where business decisions get made) and into more functional pieces (this is where parameters are matched, this is where assemblies are created). so its not all the users fault here. sure they changed the functionality, but they always do. did you have a clear game plan on how to separate classes so that they did one thing and one thing only? did you make sure that each pattern did its job? (parameters were only handled by an adaptor, assemblies only handled by a facade?). i know you think you're too deep in the fire to go back to get the firetruck but i can tell you from lots of past experience each fix can be put in place by careful deliberate steps. Paul Alagna

If you want to be helpful still, ask what was wrong with the other 3 answers. Does he understand your answer, or disagree? Do you need to better explain your answer, or is there some missing information you didn't know about why your answer won't work? Note older workers can have issues with bad communications from young workers. I'm older, but hopefully wouldn't call someone a child (to their face anyway)... (My wife doesn't like when I don't know the answer to something, she keeps asking, maybe rewording the question thinking I'll suddenly give an answer when I didn't before...)

What I find interesting is that here are us IT types being sensible. We wouldn't dream of spending the company's cash on changing names, prefixes and the like in the codebase. Meanwhile the marketing types are all spending fabulous amounts of cash on new crap that will also add no value to the company (and hiving off the old stationary supplies too, I should think) With naming I generally try to keep generic - but thre are times when you need to use some name, and having a class called "TheProductDataAtapter" doesn't roll off the tongue quite as well, does it :) MVVM# - See how I did MVVM my way ___________________________________________ Man, you're a god. - walterhevedeich 26/05/2011 .\\axxx (That's an 'M')

Dan Neely wrote: the mass moron meaning of decimate is roughly the opposite of the latin meaning Too right. Not that losing 1 in 10 men in your legion is a picnic. _____________________________ Give a man a mug, he drinks for a day. Teach a man to mug...