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: 103376,5ea968aeb8c7f10d
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
X-Google-Thread: f43e6,d71a6822cd2fec5
X-Google-Attributes: gidf43e6,public
From: mfb@mbunix.mitre.org (Michael F Brenner)
Subject: Re: Do I Really Need A Supervisor?
Date: 1997/03/19
Message-ID: <5gpqbp$spl@top.mitre.org>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 226824280
References: <5g7u24$1jeg@uni.library.ucla.edu> <dewar.858635029@merv>
 <332EC40A.6F59@ss5010.ca.boeing.com> <dewar.858712840@merv>
Organization: The MITRE Corporation
Newsgroups: comp.software-eng,comp.lang.ada
Date: 1997-03-19T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>


Robert Dewar sayeth:
    > All I am saying is that as far as I am concerned strong management is
    > essential to software quality. Even in such a minor aspect as coding
    > standards, if you have a bunch of "I don't need no stinkin' supervisor"
    > hackers, you will have trouble solving even this trivial problem (of
    > requiring consistent surface syntax).

Here is one possible solution to the problem of requiring consistent surface
syntax: Dont. Instead, set a pretty-printer to different parameters (font,
indenting, capitalization, commenting, color, etc.) each time the code is
looked at. This finds problems that may be missed in a consistent syntax 
environment. Problems, such as one extra alias of the variable causing
the error, or programs that have too high an opinion of their looks :)