From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.6 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_05,INVALID_DATE, LOTS_OF_MONEY autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 Xref: utzoo comp.lang.ada:5769 comp.lang.c++:14287 Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!sdd.hp.com!mips!pacbell.com!decwrl!netcomsv!jls From: jls@netcom.COM (Jim Showalter) Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada,comp.lang.c++ Subject: Re: chief programmer team organizations was (c++ vs ada results) Message-ID: <1991Jun21.222125.18620@netcom.COM> Date: 21 Jun 91 22:21:25 GMT References: <1991Jun18.122812.18190@eua.ericsson.se> <1991Jun18.220609.19103@netcom.COM> <1991Jun19.170047.25064@software.org> <1991Jun20.143535.27176@software.org> Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services UNIX System {408 241-9760 guest} List-Id: >He finally resorted to making the redesign but leaving a few obvious simple >flaws that even she could detect, presenting the design to her for review >and asking her help in solving those last sticky "problems". She saved >her ego, the software was corrected but the poor guy at the bottom had to >suffer through this several times and the lead got the credit when it worked. >He would have done better to let the project fail if his goal was to advance in >the organization. This project structure is not very forgiving if you place >people too high or low in the hierarchy. "Against stupidity, the gods themselves contend in vain." Sadly, this sounds like a fairly typical project. I swear, when I get in a bad mood I half believe the single most effective solution to what ails most troubled software development efforts would be to simply shoot every third manager. Arghh. On the other hand, the project I described in my earlier post was QUITE atypical. They chose Ada on its merits (didn't have to use it--just evaluated what was available and decided Ada was the only viable tool for solving their problem). They had a superb chief architect. They knew they were building 4 ships in a row, so they focused on reuse from the start as a MULTI-project objective (achieving, in the end, 70% reuse across the four projects and $117 million in savings [their numbers]). They made optimal use of Rational's technology. They were just wonderful. It's projects like this that make it all worthwhile...just wish there were more like it. -- *** LIMITLESS SOFTWARE, Inc: Jim Showalter, jls@netcom.com, (408) 243-0630 **** *Proven solutions to software problems. Consulting and training on all aspects* *of software development. Management/process/methodology. Architecture/design/* *reuse. Quality/productivity. Risk reduction. EFFECTIVE OO usage. Ada/C++. *