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=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,FREEMAIL_FROM autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 1108a1,59ec73856b699922 X-Google-Attributes: gid1108a1,public X-Google-Thread: 103376,583275b6950bf4e6 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-Thread: 11232c,59ec73856b699922 X-Google-Attributes: gid11232c,public X-Google-Thread: fdb77,5f529c91be2ac930 X-Google-Attributes: gidfdb77,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2003-04-24 19:00:03 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!cyclone.bc.net!logbridge.uoregon.edu!msunews!not-for-mail From: "Chad R. Meiners" Newsgroups: comp.lang.java.advocacy,comp.object,comp.lang.ada,misc.misc Subject: Re: the Ada mandate, and why it collapsed and died (was): 64 bit addressing and OOP Date: Thu, 24 Apr 2003 21:51:37 -0400 Organization: Michigan State University Message-ID: References: <9fa75d42.0302260618.7506cba7@posting.google.com> <3E5CF5C6.84822F57@adaworks.com> <8qkczsAcGcn+Ew83@nildram.co.uk> <3EA04A1E.CAFC1FEF@adaworks.com> <9fa75d42.0304221126.7112b7d5@posting.google.com> <9fa75d42.0304230439.55d28e70@posting.google.com> <9fa75d42.0304240503.54dbc5d1@posting.google.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: arctic.cse.msu.edu X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1158 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1165 Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.java.advocacy:62640 comp.object:61886 comp.lang.ada:36515 misc.misc:13669 Date: 2003-04-24T21:51:37-04:00 List-Id: "soft-eng" wrote in message news:9fa75d42.0304240503.54dbc5d1@posting.google.com... > It's the other way around. Software engineering is a fake field > full of charltans, simply because it stands on a false premise -- you > can take anybody and turn them into good disciplined programmers by > applications of certain principles. This is blatantly false! While there might be a good deal of people that claim to be software engineers that are charlatans, this fact (if true) does not discredit the actually field of software engineering. Furthermore, your claim the software engineering stands upon a faulty premise is a strawman argument. >The actual fact is, results > in software are to a *very* large part related to aptitude. If you > can't hire well, the project is doomed no matter how many software > engineering principles you apply. True, software engineering principles do not solve all problem (they don't claim too either), but they are not worthless either, and yes, you need competent people in order to succeed in anything. > Once you have the right people, > engineering quality will appear; Eventually--the point of software engineering is to facilitate and teach methodologies that help the right people work more effectively. > you just need to make sure I think your use of 'just' severely understates the difficulty of accomplishing the below > the design is good, the management is good (which > often means not getting in the way of good quality), > there is good quality assurance, and such less-than-flashy things. > So there are no "engineering quality" correct choices. > Some languages with straight-jacket mentalities make people > think they are rigorous, disciplined tools that will > make quality magically appear. That is deluded thinking. Nothing can prevent deluded thinking. Just like nothing can prevent people from making silly strawman arguments.