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: 103376,bcd6d4f991455640 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public From: ok@goanna.cs.rmit.EDU.AU (Richard A. O'Keefe) Subject: Re: Poetry? (was Hungarian notation) Date: 1996/06/11 Message-ID: <4pipkr$lj1@goanna.cs.rmit.EDU.AU>#1/1 X-Deja-AN: 159552766 references: <9606102206.AA14131@most> organization: Comp Sci, RMIT, Melbourne, Australia nntp-posting-user: ok newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Date: 1996-06-11T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: "W. Wesley Groleau (Wes)" writes: >> making something that actually works is not the *end* of computing, >> it's the *beginning*. >I disagree with your words, though not (I suspect) with your intent. >It is neither the end nor the beginning. First you [should] plan and >design (beginning), THEN you make it, then you support it. >BTW, it's not a bad idea to have some or all of the documentation done >BEFORE the coding..... Well, I consider the planning, design, and documentation part of the "making something that works" step. What good, for example, is a program that 'works', but whose intended users are provided with no documentation? What I really had in mind, of course, was that it is the beginning of a very difficult and costly phase in the life of a program: maintenance. Things that have no direct effect on the immediate correctness of the code can have a very large effect on the maintenance costs. -- Fifty years of programming language research, and we end up with C++ ??? Richard A. O'Keefe; http://www.cs.rmit.edu.au/~ok; RMIT Comp.Sci.