Cart
[Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries]
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@y...] > > 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> >
|
