[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
i agree len. in fact the basics of good design have been a mystery since
humans started building/making things. we seem to be able to recognise
it, but not train for it particularly well.
the most valuable course i did, relative to my current work, was in
system design - black boxes basically. don't know if it's still part of
the undergrad courses, but it should be.
rick
On Mon, 2004-02-16 at 07:47, Bullard, Claude L (Len) wrote:
> She doesn't understand what Lanier is saying or why
> XML (data objects) scale and object-oriented objects
> don't. Chess doesn't teach one to program brilliantly
> any better than sweeping floors teaches one to grade roads.
> But the real issue is not how brilliant a programmer or
> computer scientist one is: it is how brilliant a systems
> engineer one is.
>
> Logic and strategic forethought are not of necessity, the
> basics of good design. Nor is mathematics.
>
> len
>
>
> From: Dimitre Novatchev [mailto:dnovatchev@yahoo.com]
>
> From:
>
> http://java.sun.com/developer/technicalArticles/Interviews/livschitz_qa.html
>
> "The world has gone crazy with XML and then web services; SOAP and UDDI are
> getting enormous attention, and, yet, from a software engineering
> standpoint, they seem to me a setback rather then a step forward.
> We now have a generation of young programmers who think of software in terms
> of square brackets. An enormous mess of XML documents that are now being
> created by enterprises at an alarming rate will be haunting our industry for
> decades. With all that excitement, no one seems to have the slightest
> interest in basic computer science."
>
> -----------------------------------------------------------------
> The xml-dev list is sponsored by XML.org <http://www.xml.org>, an
> initiative of OASIS <http://www.oasis-open.org>
>
> The list archives are at http://lists.xml.org/archives/xml-dev/
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe from this list use the subscription
> manager: <http://lists.xml.org/ob/adm.pl>
>
|
