Re: In defense of Admiral tuttle

[cis.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!darwin.sura.net!source.asset.com!s hilling@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU (Keith Shillington)]

 (David Weller) writes:
>
>....  It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out that
>proliferation of "specialized" languages for "mainstream" software
>development will drive up long-term costs like crazy.  ....

Right on.  It seems that in a great deal of the discussions about what
language is better that what language, the topics of longevity and
maintenance seem to be ignored.  This occurs to me a more of a cultural
problem than anything else.  We seem to have for too much concern on the
process of _developing_ software; when MOST programmers (gainfully
employed programmers) are working at _maintaining_ existing sofware.

The point to discuss is what features of a language, and ultimately a
methodology to use with that language will cause a reduction in the
ongoing costs of maintaining that software.

As a nation, we have several bridges and dams that are about to reach,
or have reached, the end of their 50 year life expectancy.  What now?
What is the average life expectancy of any given software system?  Why
are the numbers so small?

Hey gang, let's think about the future here.  The planet will be here
for quite some time to come, but what of us?

with Standard.Disclaimer;  -- that's some child package!
Keith Shillington;
FasTrak Training, San Diego Earth Day, Pragmatic Solutions, and other
hats as needed.  (shilling@asset.source.com)


-- 
  Keith Shillington               /---------\   "No matter where you go,
email: shilling@source.ASSET.com   /=======\     There you are."
voice: (619) 944-5134               /_____\          -- Buckaroo Banzaii
fax  : (619) 944-7089                 | |         office: (301) 924-0050