Somehow, i'm not sure if i like the word "pattern". Patterns are something which can be used generally and repeatedly. I think that's sort of scary. For example: I've learned factory usage while doing twisted and it came naturally how and why this was used. But somehow i feel that with all those books and courses about "design patterns" new programers are missing out how to find a solution. It's like "here are your tools, MVC, factories and observers, try to solve your problems with those". This can be dangerous when a programer first looks how he can mold his problem to be solved with some pattern, whereas he should first analyse the problem and use patterns carefully where they fit naturally. I'm scared of a programming world where every bit is solved by factories of factories of metafactories ;)
Design patterns are useful because they improve.. design. I mean application and code design. They model a recognizable structure. You are right: they have been sold as the ace of all trades in CS books and courses and they are not. That lead to the ' factories of factories of metafactories ' situation. Experience and intelligence are the real 'ace of all trades'. On the other side chaos is not good for anyone. Instead having a common lingo to identify code structure and common solutions to local architectural challenges is a good thing.
So, wouldn't it be better to write books on how someone got from a problem to a solution and why the outcome was something that can be described as a factory pattern, rather then the other way around?
I didn't read books on design patterns, but the book from the link structures around what design patterns there are and how they got applied to a problem. It'd be nicer to first have a problem and show why and how a particular pattern is better than, say, a bunch of monolithic lines of code.. So that you can say "oh and by the way, the way we solved that problem falls into the category of factory patterns".
