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=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham
	autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Thread: 103376,93a8020cc980d113
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: What is wrong with Ada?
References: <1176150704.130880.248080@l77g2000hsb.googlegroups.com>
 <zyBSh.44138$oV.14776@attbi_s21>
 <461B52A6.20102@obry.net> <zvOSh.45388$oV.18561@attbi_s21>
 <krrspgzz88g4$.15lzsnhxml4j.dlg@40tude.net>
 <1176332730.826176.286450@y5g2000hsa.googlegroups.com>
 <Xns991044830E503pchapinsovernet@198.186.192.137>
From: Markus E Leypold
 <development-2006-8ecbb5cc8aREMOVETHIS@ANDTHATm-e-leypold.de>
Organization: N/A
Date: Thu, 12 Apr 2007 15:04:28 +0200
Message-ID: <21veg1agmb.fsf@hod.lan.m-e-leypold.de>
User-Agent: Some cool user agent (SCUG)
Cancel-Lock: sha1:AkZlagoW6XQdQJ3j9sjEG/+ODNI=
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
NNTP-Posting-Host: 88.72.204.82
X-Trace: news.arcor-ip.de 1176382625 88.72.204.82 (12 Apr 2007 14:57:05 +0200)
X-Complaints-To: abuse@arcor-ip.de
Path: 
 g2news1.google.com!news4.google.com!feeder3.cambrium.nl!feed.tweaknews.nl!newsfeed0.kamp.net!newsfeed.kamp.net!news.unit0.net!newsfeed.arcor-ip.de!news.arcor-ip.de!not-for-mail
Xref: g2news1.google.com comp.lang.ada:14932
Date: 2007-04-12T15:04:28+02:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>


"Peter C. Chapin" <pchapin@sover.net> writes:

> "kevin  cline" <kevin.cline@gmail.com> wrote in
> news:1176332730.826176.286450@y5g2000hsa.googlegroups.com: 
>
>> You are right about that.  Other engineering disciplines apply
>> physical laws to the construction of human artifacts.  There are no
>> physical laws governing software.
>
> I'm not sure that's entirely true. For example, it appears that some 
> solvable problems are fundamentally intractable (the NP complete problems), 
> and others are provably unsolvable in the general case (the undecidable 
> problems). There is some kind of structure to computational problems and we 
> didn't invent that structure. It is a fact of nature. Software engineers 
> have to deal with these inherent properties of the universe to build 
> software that solves real world problems. It sounds similar to "ordinary" 
> engineering to me.

Also "ordinary engineering" does more than just apply phyisical
laws. I.e. there is the whole issue of stabdardization and how to use
standards properly. Project management also is -- more or less -- a
part of engineering.

Regards -- Markus