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,f66d11aeda114c52 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public From: WhiteR@nospamplease.CRPL.Cedar-Rapids.lib.IA.US (Robert S. White) Subject: Re: Critique of Ariane 5 paper (finally!) Date: 1997/08/14 Message-ID: <5stp3g$doe$1@flood.weeg.uiowa.edu>#1/1 X-Deja-AN: 264498512 References: <33E503B3.3278@flash.net> <33E8FC54.41C67EA6@eiffel.com> <33E9B217.39DA@flash.net> <33EA5592.5855@flash.net> <33EB4935.167EB0E7@eiffel.com> <33EB754E.446B9B3D@eiffel.com> <33EBE46D.2149@flash.net> <33EF9487.41C67EA6@eiffel.com> <33F20BCE.AB3@link.com> <33F22AD8.41C67EA6@eiffel.com> Organization: A manufacturer where I have worked since 1975 Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Date: 1997-08-14T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: In article <33F22AD8.41C67EA6@eiffel.com>, Bertrand.Meyer@eiffel.com says... > >It seems that the idea of using modern techniques to >improve software reliability shocks some people so much >that they will find no argument too low in their effort >to suppress it. Won't work. > This seems to me to be stooping a bit low. I am more than willing to use new "validated" methods of improving/doing software engineering. That is why the company I work for decided it was very worthwhile to implement the CMM (now independently certified to level 3) and ISO-900x (again independently certified). I have been able to take company funded courses in OOA, OOD and software inspections taught by outside contractors brought it just for the course. I am using the UML to document the high level software design of the hard real time project that I have been working on for the last few months. Convince me of the techinical merits of this new engineering approach/tool/method for my problem domain and I will most willingly use it. All(most?) of us engineers are inherently lazy and _want_ to use the most error free, efficient, high quality design techniques that gain us satisfaction of a job well done. A job poorly done will come back to haunt you unless you change jobs often. Some of us don't. We have been taking a very thorough look at JAVA technologies and are already committed to making the JVM and JAVA byte code work well for our applications. Argue your position on its technical merits and please do not make broad generalizations about the motives of authors of critiques of your statements. _____________________________________________________________________ Robert S. White -- An embedded systems software engineer