Re: Ada & top-down design - was defending Greg

Re: Ada & top-down design - was defending Greg

[cis.ohio-state.edu!pacific.mps.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland]

In article <1vu0hn$e0r@europa.eng.gtefsd.com>, eric@capella.tsc.gtefsd.com (Eri
c Peterson) writes:
> 
> Maybe the real problem with Ada is its focus on top-down design, where
> the C developers have typically preferred build-a-little test-a-little.

Even though I have been designing in Ada the past three years, I still use
the iterative approach (learned in my Fortran V days).  This approach works
equally well in designing any software system, but is certainly not limited
to any programming language.  Any program that designs and designs without
continually checking its design with an iterative approach is heading for
trouble (yes this does happen in the non-mandated world!).

> The waste I see every day is top-down designers in long meetings
> producing designs which are worthless in the long run due to
> inadequate, incomplete, and impossible requirements.

The good engineers here try to promote good design as well as an iterative
approach.  We have 100 thousand lines of Ada code that have to come
together by the end of the year.  We are on our third major software build,
with several minor builds inbetween.  We are doing design/code/debug all at
the same time.  Each piece of the software within the system is at a
different level of maturity, and there is no way that we could possibly
wait for all the software to be designed before implementing any part of
it.  BTW, all this software had to be developed in 18 to 20 months - a real
challenge for any project.

-- 
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Todd A Sorensen               Honeywell Defense Avionics Systems Division
505-828-5611                  internet: tsorense@dasd.honeywell.com
                              internet: tas@dasd.honeywell.com
------------------------------------------------------------------------------