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=2.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_50,INVALID_MSGID, REPLYTO_WITHOUT_TO_CC autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,82c2596e4584d057 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public From: "Stephen D. House" Subject: Re: Ariane 5 Failure - Summary Report Date: 1996/07/24 Message-ID: <31F6D5B2.546C@ro.com>#1/1 X-Deja-AN: 169984614 references: <31F60E8A.2D74@lmtas.lmco.com> <31F629B8.5FFB@lmtas.lmco.com> <31F69073.1913@lfwc.lockheed.com> content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii organization: RENAISSANCE INTERNET SERVICES mime-version: 1.0 reply-to: house@ro.com newsgroups: comp.lang.ada x-mailer: Mozilla 3.0b4 (Win95; I) Date: 1996-07-24T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: Byron B. Kauffman wrote: > I guess we're going to have to trade in our 'software engineering' hats > for 'software scavenger/cut-and-paste/rewrite-the-interfaces' hats > (otherwise known as HACKING). > > Just my opinion, of course. For a rocket, you might be right. BUT... One of the advantages of "visual" programming languages is that they are a language which ties together components. The software crises will not be reduced until productivity goes up. Productivity isn't the number of lines of code you can code a month, its how much functionality you can give you your customer per month. Unless software houses part building products by putting together subsystems instead of subprograms, no gains will be made. COTS is one way. In house components; ones which are understood, domain specific, consistent with other components, etc.; are better solutions. I don't think that companies are doing enough with reuse. They'd rather buy a magic bullet from somebody else than dig through their own attic for something.