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-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: fdb77,c9f2b97a84c48976 X-Google-Attributes: gidfdb77,public X-Google-Thread: 101deb,23963231b5359f74 X-Google-Attributes: gid101deb,public X-Google-Thread: 103376,23963231b5359f74 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-Thread: 1073c2,23963231b5359f74 X-Google-Attributes: gid1073c2,public X-Google-Thread: 10a146,23963231b5359f74 X-Google-Attributes: gid10a146,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2001-07-18 03:39:29 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!newsfeed.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!news-spur1.maxwell.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!newsfeed.media.kyoto-u.ac.jp!sjc-peer.news.verio.net!news.verio.net!iad-read.news.verio.net.POSTED!not-for-mail Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada,comp.lang.java.programmer,comp.lang.pl1,comp.lang.vrml,comp.lang.java.advocacy References: <9gsvr7$7ho$1@nh.pace.co.uk> Software <3b366a2b$6$fuzhry$mr2ice@va.news.verio.net> <9h7guv$pt1$1@nh.pace.co.uk> <3B3879CE.AC550F8E@acm.org> <3B3E73E8.F9C36524@ix.netcom.com> <3B405DDF.5C3F9207@acm.org> <3B416975.D7F0691D@ix.netcom.com> <3B432AD8.3828FB9@acm.org> <9i1q0r$324$1@nh.pace.co.uk> <7F917.2087$jf.539468852@newssvr17.news.prodigy.com> <3B4648A3.BECC1FE8@acm.org> <3B47CB75.234C0543@acm.or g> <3b52d7f5$1$fuzhry$mr2ice@va.news.verio.net> From: "Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz" Subject: Re: Market pressures for more reliable software Mail-Copies-To: nobody Organization: Atid/2 X-Cise: "Tony Schliesser" X-CompuServe-Customer: Yes X-Coriate: NCAE@NewAmerica.org X-Ecrate: Bob Germer X-Punge: Micro$oft X-Sanguinate: themvsguy@email.com X-Terminate: SPA(GIS) Message-ID: <3b538445$1$fuzhry$mr2ice@va.news.verio.net> X-Newsreader: MR/2 Internet Cruiser Edition for OS/2 v2.28a/28 Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2001 20:18:13 -0400 NNTP-Posting-Host: 206.55.10.86 X-Complaints-To: abuse@verio.net X-Trace: iad-read.news.verio.net 995452768 206.55.10.86 (Wed, 18 Jul 2001 10:39:28 GMT) NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2001 10:39:28 GMT Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:10143 comp.lang.java.programmer:83276 comp.lang.pl1:1239 comp.lang.vrml:4055 comp.lang.java.advocacy:23699 Date: 2001-07-16T20:18:13-04:00 List-Id: In , on 07/16/2001 at 05:37 PM, "Ken Garlington" said: >Unfortunately, your argument was a straw man, since you used a >definition different than the one I referenced in my premise. ROTF,LMAO! >Since your definition of "centralized programming" seems now to be >based on organizational structures, not technology Now? That's been the case all along. >(making your earlier discussion of >remote job entry somewhat puzzling), Only to one who doesn't understand the logistics. perhaps you could post some examples of "centralized programming" from this list of historical precedents which occured "quite often," MAX, aka ALS. >and discuss what key concepts they shared to make them >"centralized". I've already enumerated them. >As I noted previously, one definition of "centralized" programming >is the business environment as described in Brooks (and other >respondents to this thread), with the key concepts of (a) the CPUs >are physically located close together, in a single room or suite and >(b) where the task of programming (coding) requires the programmers >to either enter the program at a single "master" console, What have you been smoking. That mode of operation died in the 50s, if not earlier. Certainly by 1960 programs were entered from cards, paper tape or magnetic tape, not from the console. >or to submit the programming job to a centrally located operator >corps for entry. I'm not sure what you mean by "programming job". If you mean "batch job", there were plenty of "self serve" card readers at computer centers in the late sixties, to say nothing of the Bisync work stations you seem not to believe in. >By contrast, "decentralized" programming has automation routinely >available at the programmer's work station (desk, etc.) without need >of an intermediary. (Brooks describes this as "interactive >programming," ROTF,LMAO! You're conflating unrelated terms. >I suppose that you could establish "being correct" through some >means other than the logic steps taught in debate classes (faith, >etc.), but it would be hypocritical to use these methods and then >castigate others for "refraining from logic." So we agree that you're a hypocrite. >Actually, if you haven't read "Mythical Math-Month" I have. >(or have forgotten it), I haven't. Including the discrepancies that went over your head. -- ----------------------------------------------------------- Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg and JOAT Atid/2 Team OS/2 Team PL/I Any unsolicited commercial junk E-mail will be subject to legal action. I reserve the right to publicly post or ridicule any abusive E-mail. I mangled my E-mail address to foil automated spammers; reply to domain acm dot org user shmuel to contact me. Do not reply to spamtrap@library.lspace.org -----------------------------------------------------------