Re: Is strong typing worth the cost?

["Marin David Condic" <dont.bother.mcondic.auntie.spam@[acm.org>]

Maybe. Maybe not. I have not made a thorough study of it, but have read some
descriptions of it. But as for "Waterfall" - I don't think anybody ever
actually did anything of significance in a pure "Waterfall" method - even if
they say they did. Almost any project of size has to deal with changes
midstream that require going back to revisit requirements or design or other
things along the way - thus really creating a kind of spiral model. Most of
the projects I've been on have involved iterative builds of some sort - how
fast and when are always an issue.

Keep in mind that a lot of technologies have come out where adherents start
to think they have found a panacea - including Ada. Usually, you gain
something and give something else up along the way. Not that Ada or XP or
<insert the next hip thing here> isn't going to possibly produce a step
forward, but usually it isn't as "revolutionary" as the marketers would have
you believe and you still need something approximating "science"
demonstrating that it does some good (and in what circumstances) rather than
relying on gut instinct, perceptions or theory. Software really has a hard
time with this.

MDC
--
Marin David Condic
Senior Software Engineer
Pace Micro Technology Americas    www.pacemicro.com
Enabling the digital revolution
e-Mail:    marin.condic@pacemicro.com


"Darren New" <dnew@san.rr.com> wrote in message
news:3CD329FE.C067B6CE@san.rr.com...
>
> Um, I think you've not read enough. Or you've read it thru
> preconception-filters that keep you from seeing what's going on there.
> Not saying that it's good or bad, but it's certainly nothing that a
> cowboy coder could ever manage. The process is quite formal. It's just
> not "waterfall".
>