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=0.7 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_DATE, MSGID_SHORT,REPLYTO_WITHOUT_TO_CC autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 Xref: utzoo comp.lang.ada:3554 alt.cobol:133 comp.software-eng:3288 Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!uwm.edu!cs.utexas.edu!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!pt.cs.cmu.edu!sei!rsd From: rsd@sei.cmu.edu (Richard S D'Ippolito) Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada,alt.cobol,comp.software-eng Subject: Re: Programming vs. Software Engineering Message-ID: <6599@ae.sei.cmu.edu> Date: 27 Mar 90 15:54:56 GMT References: <5723@odin.corp.sgi.com> Reply-To: rsd@sei.cmu.edu (Richard S D'Ippolito) Followup-To: comp.lang.ada, comp.software-eng Distribution: usa Organization: Software Engineering Institute, Pittsburgh, PA List-Id: Sorry to pick on this one, but it's representative: In article <5723@odin.corp.sgi.com> Archer Sully writes: >You still haven't shown (and never will show, at this rate) that Ada is >not only sufficient but necessary for producing good code, which appears >to be your stated aim. > >Archer Sully I'm a bit more than tired of this -- the current discussions have turned these groups into sandboxes, and the flying stuff is irritating my eyes. I would suggest that those who insist on comparing their pails by color take the exchange off line or to alt.lang.wars. My sometimes-clouded mind has concluded, possibly due to a malfunction, that comp.lang.ada exists for the discussion of any Ada-related issue, from its place in software engineering, to its effect on the procurement process, to its compilers, to its successful uses, etc., and is mainly of interest to those who are trying their best to produce quality software for the USDoD. Those of you who wish to point out that Ada is imperfect are only confirming what man has already learned about the artifacts of man. You are cheerfully invited to submit your suggestions to the Ada 9X committee. Anyone who attended the 89 TRI-Ada conference had the opportunity to hear Robert Firth warn that there would be no language perfection in our lifetimes and to hear him urge us to get on with the job. Those of you who share my delusion that Ada and Software Engineering are not one and the same are invited to share your experiences in comp.software-eng with those of us who are trying to bring software development up to the level of engineering that now exists in the many traditional engineering disciplines. Is not there much more than the art (or science, to the extent that it is one) of crafting code? Several times in the past year, I and members of our group have published pointers to papers describing our experiences in using Ada for real efforts and describing our methods. That we have received no responses leads me to conclude, again, maybe erroneously, that there are only two types of reader here -- those who already know the benefits of Ada and those who are not receptive to information which might undermine cherished language and practice beliefs. We were hoping to hear from the uncommitted, and from those who could help us improve the state of the practice by reviewing our efforts and by relating theirs. Rich D'Ippolito Software Architectures Engineering Project SEI, Pittsburgh PS: I have left the reference to atl.cobol in the distribution in order that that related followups be directed to the appropriate one of the other two groups. I do not subscribe to it. -- How do you know how I can see lessen you kin look out my eyes? Hoke, in _Driving Miss Daisy_ rsd@sei.cmu.edu ------------------------------------------------------------------------