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=-1.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID
	autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: fac41,e01bd86884246855
X-Google-Attributes: gidfac41,public
X-Google-Thread: 103376,fb1663c3ca80b502
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
From: David Gillon <david.gillon@baesystems.com>
Subject: Re: Interresting thread in comp.lang.eiffel
Date: 2000/07/19
Message-ID: <3975D959.52679BA2@baesystems.com>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 648258220
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
References: <8ipvnj$inc$1@wanadoo.fr> <8j67p8$afd$1@nnrp1.deja.com>
 <slrn8leffq.ebq.gisle@spurv.ii.uib.no>
  <395886DA.CCE008D2@deepthought.com.au> <3958B07B.18A5BB8C@acm.com>
  <y1d65.620$7%3.33446@news.flash.net> <395A0ECA.940560D1@acm.com>
  <8jd4bb$na7$1@toralf.uib.no> <8jfabb$1d8$1@nnrp1.deja.com>
 <8jhq0m$30u5$1@toralf.uib.no> <8jt4j7$19hpk$1@ID-9852.news.cis.dfn.de>
 <3963CDDE.3E8FB644@earthlink.net> <3963DEBF.79C40BF1@eiffel.com>
 <2LS85.6100$7%3.493920@news.flash.net>
 <8k5aru$1odtq$1@ID-9852.news.cis.dfn.de>
 <Rnt95.7826$7%3.596208@news.flash.net>
 <8k8pk2$20cab$1@ID-9852.news.cis.dfn.de>
 <_dS95.9945$7%3.666180@news.flash.net> <qe_a5.259$6E.64803@ptah.visi.com>
 <396C9C7F.D9B20E5F@baesystems.com> <unZc5.208$2y3.8676@read2.inet.fi>
X-Accept-Language: en
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
X-Trace: 19 Jul 2000 17:35:03 GMT, rc3284.rochstr.gmav.gecm.com
Organization: BAE SYSTEMS Avionics (Rochester)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada,comp.lang.eiffel
Date: 2000-07-19T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>



Veli-Pekka Nousiainen wrote:

> > what was wanted. Think Dilbert 1 trying to have a technical discussion
> > with Dilbert 2 by passing verbal messages through ten layers of pointy
> > haired bosses each.... The assumption that this would logically result
> 
> The software inheritance layers are not what you were talking about?!

Well yes, that's the fundamental issue, but there's so much noise* in
the communications channels of big multi-national, multi-company,
multi-system projects that the assumption that the need for some
information to do the job will automatically result in a timely and
crystal clear exchange of information between engineers is hopelessly
naive.

* 'noise' in this case could be legal constraints, security constraints,
institutional inertia, liability issues, IPR issues, cross-cultural
misunderstandings, cross-corporate-cultural misunderstandings, arguments
over who pays for the time, etc, etc, etc....

-- 


David Gillon