有人能解释一下软件设计和软件架构的区别吗?
更具体地说;如果你让别人给你展示“设计”——你希望他们展示什么?“建筑”也是如此。
我目前的理解是:
设计:系统特定模块/部分的UML图/流程图/简单线框(用于UI) 架构:组件图(显示系统的不同模块如何相互通信以及如何与其他系统通信)，要使用什么语言，模式……?
如果我说错了，请指正。我提到了维基百科在http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Software_design和http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Software_architecture上有文章，但我不确定我是否理解正确。
当前回答
体系结构更像是集成系统的各种功能，以实现系统的一个整体目标，而设计则解决每个功能需求。
例如，以MVVM为例，这是一种体系结构模式。对于通知功能，MVVM使用观察者模式，这又是一种设计模式，
其他回答
...long time ago in a faraway place philosophers worried about the distinction between the one and the many. Architecture is about relationship, which requires the many. Architecture has components. Design is about content, which requires the one. Design has properties, qualities, characteristics. We typically think that design is within architecture. Dualistic thinking gives the many as primordial. But architecture is also within design. It's all how we choose to view what is before us - the one or the many.
如果有人建造了一艘船，那么发动机、船体、电路等将是他的“建筑元素”。对他来说，发动机制造将是“设计工作”。
如果他将引擎的构建委托给另一个团队，他们将创建一个“引擎架构”……
这取决于抽象和细节的程度。一个人的建筑可能是另一个人的设计!
我像Patrick Karcher一样看待建筑——从大局出发。例如，您可以为建筑物提供架构，查看其结构支撑、窗户、入口和出口、排水等。但你并没有“设计”楼层布局、隔间位置等。
所以当你设计了大楼的时候，你并没有设计每个办公室的布局。 我认为这同样适用于软件。
你可以把设计布局看作是“设计布局”……
这个问题没有明确的答案，因为“软件架构”和“软件设计”有相当多的定义，而且都没有一个规范的定义。
一个很好的思考方法是Len Bass, Paul Clements和Rick Kazman的声明，“所有的架构都是设计，但并不是所有的设计都是架构”[软件架构实践]。我不确定我是否完全同意这一点(因为架构可以包括其他活动)，但它抓住了架构是处理设计的关键子集的设计活动的本质。
我的稍微轻率的定义(在SEI定义页面上找到)是，它是一组决策，如果做出错误的决定，将导致项目被取消。
A useful attempt at separating architecture, design and implementation as concepts was done by Amnon Eden and Rick Kazman some years ago in a research paper entitled "Architecture, Design, Implementation" which can be found here: http://www.sei.cmu.edu/library/assets/ICSE03-1.pdf. Their language is quite abstract but simplistically they say that architecture is design that can be used in many contexts and is meant to be applied across the system, design is (err) design that can be used in many contexts but is applied in a specific part of the system, and implementation is design specific to a context and applied in that context.
So an architectural decision could be a decision to integrate the system via messaging rather than RPC (so it's a general principle that could be applied in many places and is intended to apply to the whole system), a design decision might be to use a master/slave thread structure in the input request handling module of the system (a general principle that could be used anywhere but in this case is just used in one module) and finally, an implementation decision might be to move responsibilities for security from the Request Router to the Request Handler in the Request Manager module (a decision relevant only to that context, used in that context).
我希望这能有所帮助!
体系结构确定了系统的基本组件，描述了它们的组织，以及它们与创建系统框架的关系。
设计描述了各种组件，以及应该如何在系统架构提供的框架中开发它们以提供所需的功能。
