From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.5-pre1 (2020-06-20) on
	ip-172-31-74-118.ec2.internal
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.5 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_05 autolearn=ham
	autolearn_force=no version=3.4.5-pre1
Date: 25 Jan 93 15:04:36 GMT
From: saimiri.primate.wisc.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!sdd.hp.com!hpscit.sc.h
p.com!hplextra!hpcss01!hpwala!hpavla!hawk@ames.arc.nasa.gov  (Dave Hawk)
Subject: Re: Why and how do organizations select the OO approach to S.E
Message-ID: <9110004@hpavla.lf.hp.com>
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

>mfeldman@seas.gwu.edu (Michael Feldman @ George Washington University) writes
>
>    They hired a _really_ big-name consultant (NOT a professor, Mark!)
>    to teach them his OO methodology and take a first crack at a design
>    for them. After collecting a very large fee, he walked away from the
>    project, leaving behind what they say is an unworkable design. 

>bs@alice.att.com (Bjarne Stroustrup) writes:
>I realize you probably can't name names, but it would be nice if you could
>for two reasons. Firstly because charaltans ought to be exposed, secondly
>because someone could misinterpret your statement into something condemning
>lange groups of ``OO-experts'' as windbags who don't deliver. (there are
>no shortage of windbags and self-proclaimed ``experts,'' but no one field
>has a monopoly on them).

In comp.lang.ada, rlk@VisiCom.COM (Bob Kitzberger) writes:
> There is a possibility, of course, that the design was indeed 'good', but
> the engineers on the project weren't qualified enough (read: OO-educated,
> open-minded, etc.) to implement it.

This would still indicate that he walked away to soon.  It would seem that
part of his responsibilities would be to get the engineers sufficiently
up to speed to successfully carry out the design.  On the other hand, he 
may have had the misfortune to walk into a very politicized situation where 
he counldn't win no matter how good his solution was...

David Hawk