Re: Software Engineering: Art or Science?

In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
           [EMAIL PROTECTED] "John Larkin" writes:

> Except for hard DSP applications, or realtime closed-loop control,
> software design seldom has a mathematical (or even theoretical) basis,
> and no predictive theory is used in software system design. People
> mostly just write code based on experience, and then try it out. This
> certainly isn't science, and barely qualifies as engineering.

I don't know where you have experienced software development but it
certainly is not that way with me. I do have a theory, ahead of writing 
code, of what I want achieved by the code, how it will sit on the
hardware and also a risk and reliability assessment down to the module 
level. I often write the definitive description of what is required
of many of the sub-routines (certainly the upper abstraction layers
and the hardware interface layers). From this attention to detail I
can certify that the code does exactly as required as specified by
that definitive description (glossary text).
 
> It would only be art if the programs were beautiful, but they're
> usually ugly.

If the code starts looking ugly you have taken a wrong direction
somewhere and should go back and re-think. Robust code is most often
simply elegant and beautiful to behold. I think that applies in most
languages and is not just a Forth thing.

-- 
********************************************************************
Paul E. Bennett ....................<email://[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Forth based HIDECS Consultancy .....<http://www.amleth.demon.co.uk/>
Mob: +44 (0)7811-639972 .........NOW AVAILABLE:- HIDECS COURSE......
Tel: +44 (0)1235-811095 .... see http://www.feabhas.com for details.
Going Forth Safely ..... EBA. www.electric-boat-association.org.uk..
********************************************************************