Path: utzoo!censor!isgtec!robert
From: robert@isgtec.UUCP (Robert Osborne)
Newsgroups: comp.software-eng
Subject: Re: The Errors of TEX
Summary: Big Bang has it's Uses
Message-ID: <175@isgtec.UUCP>
Date: 22 Oct 89 17:10:32 GMT
References: <2402@munnari.oz.au> <624@richsun.UUCP>
Reply-To: robert@isgtec.UUCP (Robert Osborne)
Organization: ISG Technologies Inc., Mississauga, Ontario
Lines: 32

In article <624@richsun.UUCP> cweir@richsun.UUCP (Charles Weir) writes:
>Part of the problem is just our own human limitations.   It is possible
>to keep us to 9 (nine) things in our minds at one time.   A
>well-designed module with a limited number of interfaces will have of
>this order of things (interfaces, globals, whatever) to think about and
>match and test.   So we can cope with modules.
Debugging usually consists of finding undesired behaviour and thinking
"where could that have happened".  Being able to track 7-9 things in
our short term memory shouldn't really affect that process.

>A big bang - everything at once - debug session needs the engineer to
>keep dozens, if not thousands of things in mind at once.
>
>Impossible.
>
>So it doesn't work.
I have found that systems with a large percentage of user interface are
best tested with the "big bang" method.  Since interaction of the various
user controlled subsystems are the source of most of bugs,  it is best to
get all the subsystems running together as soon as possible.  Having each
subsystem working perfectly on it's own doesn't really get you that much
closer the end of the project.

An advantage of not using the "big bang" method is that you get a constant
mix of development and debug, and (hopefully) won't get bored of either
one.

Rob.
-- 
Robert A. Osborne                  ...uunet!mnetor!lsuc!isgtec!robert
(Nice sig Bruce mind if I steal it :-)    ...utzoo!lsuc!isgtec!robert
ISG Technologies Inc. 3030 Orlando Dr. Mississauga. Ont. Can. L4V 1S8