Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!aplcen!uakari.primate.wisc.edu!dali.cs.montana.edu!rpi!uupsi!sunic!dkuug!iesd!kjeld
From: kjeld@iesd.auc.dk (Kjeld Flarup)
Newsgroups: comp.software-eng
Subject: Re: CASE - The Emperor has no clothes on!
Keywords: CASE rubbish
Message-ID: <1990Jun11.120915.320@iesd.auc.dk>
Date: 11 Jun 90 12:09:15 GMT
References: <37538@genrad.UUCP> <3205@goanna.cs.rmit.oz.au>
Reply-To: kjeld@iesd.auc.dk (Kjeld Flarup)
Organization: Mathematics & Computer Science, University of Aalborg
Lines: 40

In article <3205@goanna.cs.rmit.oz.au> pnm@goanna.cs.rmit.oz.au (Paul Big-Ears Menon) writes:
>charlie@genrad.com (Charlie D. Havener) writes:
>
>>...
>>The CRC ( Class Responsibility Collabortators ) method is one that uses 4 
>>by 6 index
>>cards and it seems well on it's way to becoming a standard technique.
>	
>	I'm looking at this method to teach first year students - and it
>    appears the most appropriate, to get them used to "thinking like an object".
>    I would dearly love to find some further refs on this, apart from the 
>    OOPSLA proceedings.
>
>>I've said enough. If anyone can provide a substantive rebuttal I would 
>>like to hear it.
>	I can't, I can add something to explain why though (you mentioned it
>	too).  CASE tools mean money, books, courses - a whole business.
>	No one wants to promote something which doesn't make money.  As I
>	see it, Object-Oriented design is *intuitive*, it's simple, but
>	intangible - ie, there are no rules, formal methods/procedures
>	one follows.  It is, in a sense, still an art to determine class
>	structure, etc..  What CASE guys hate is - it's not strictly top-down, 
>	has no flow-charts, nor structure diagrams.  CRC is ample, 
>	technology free and is a great way to utilise those boxes of unused
>	punch cards.  I am open to alternate views though and would also 
>	like to hear them.

I have not read about the CRC method, but how is it to maintain.
When it comes to maintaining, SASD documentation is very informative.

Because the goverment want to have the information needed to review and later
maintain systems, the large SASD documentation fullfills this need.

Now does other development methods give a good documentation. And can
it be done properbly without a computer. I mean you do not write books in
handwriting anymore. Furthermore do you update documentation in handwriting ?

-- 
*     I am several thousand pages behind my reading schedule.    *
Kjeld Flarup Christensen                         kjeld@iesd.auc.dk