Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!hsi!stpstn!cox
From: cox@stpstn.UUCP (Brad Cox)
Newsgroups: comp.software-eng
Subject: Re: CASE - The Emperor has no clothes on!
Message-ID: <5290@stpstn.UUCP>
Date: 28 Jun 90 16:22:19 GMT
References: <37538@genrad.UUCP> <55137@microsoft.UUCP> <1990Jun13.070649.14929@caen.engin.umich.edu> <EACHUS.90Jun21193047@aries.linus.mitre.org> <CIMSHOP!DAVIDM.90Jun22154650@uunet.UU.NET> <5257@stpstn.UUCP> <CIMSHOP!DAVIDM.90Jun25103113@uunet.UU.NET>
Reply-To: cox@stpstn.UUCP (Brad Cox)
Distribution: comp
Organization: Stepstone
Lines: 88

In article <CIMSHOP!DAVIDM.90Jun25103113@uunet.UU.NET> cimshop!davidm@uunet.UU.NET (David S. Masterson) writes:
<In article <5257@stpstn.UUCP> cox@stpstn.UUCP (Brad Cox) writes:
<
<   I use a slide in which Mrs. Kahootie's plumber proposes to build a
<   plumbing system as we'd build software, by designing and building 
<   everything from first principles rather than by buying standard
<   components from the plumbing supply store.
<
<   Suppose she lacked the common sense to refuse. Imagine the difficulties
<   that *she* would face with precisely the questions that you've asked.
<
<I'm not sure I catch your meaning in this analogy.  My questions for you is:
<
<- Where'd the "standard components" come from in the first place?
<- What *standards* were they produced to?  With what proof?
<- Will the "standard components" work together?  Again, with what proof?
<
<I'd feel kind of sorry for Mrs. Kahootie if she expected things to be built
<right and trusted the plumber to do *the right thing*, but only made sure that
<"the price was right".  If she didn't bother to check on where the plumber got
<his training or whether or not he was using shoddy material, then she got what
<she paid for!
<
<Software development "components" are no where's near the level of stability
<and surety that plumbing tools are!  If I was expecting to make a living off
<of the system built with components, I'd want to know their expected
<capabilities and have some proof to back it up with.  I certainly hope that
<any software vendors looking to make a living off of "components" are thinking
<the same way!
<
<You'll note that there is nothing in the above that suggests that every system
<must be built from "first principles".  Even the reference to my article was
<meant to suggest that you can build up from smaller pieces, but you need to
<establish a "confidence level" in those smaller pieces.  The question is how?
<
<
<--
<===================================================================
<David Masterson					Consilium, Inc.
<uunet!cimshop!davidm				Mt. View, CA  94043
<===================================================================
<"If someone thinks they know what I said, then I didn't say it!"

Newsgroups: comp.software-eng
Subject: Re: CASE - The Emperor has no clothes on!
Summary: 
Expires: 
References: <37538@genrad.UUCP> <55137@microsoft.UUCP> <1990Jun13.070649.14929@caen.engin.umich.edu> <EACHUS.90Jun21193047@aries.linus.mitre.org> <CIMSHOP!DAVIDM.90Jun22154650@uunet.UU.NET> <5257@stpstn.UUCP> <CIMSHOP!DAVIDM.90Jun25103113@uunet.UU.NET>
Sender: 
Reply-To: cox@stpstn.UUCP (Brad Cox)
Followup-To: 
Distribution: comp
Organization: Stepstone
Keywords: 

In article <CIMSHOP!DAVIDM.90Jun25103113@uunet.UU.NET> cimshop!davidm@uunet.UU.NET (David S. Masterson) writes:
<In article <5257@stpstn.UUCP> cox@stpstn.UUCP (Brad Cox) writes:
<
<   I use a slide in which Mrs. Kahootie's plumber proposes to build a
<   plumbing system as we'd build software, by designing and building 
<   everything from first principles rather than by buying standard
<   components from the plumbing supply store.
<
<   Suppose she lacked the common sense to refuse. Imagine the difficulties
<   that *she* would face with precisely the questions that you've asked.
<
<I'm not sure I catch your meaning in this analogy.  My questions for you is:
<
<- Where'd the "standard components" come from in the first place?

From the next-lower echelon of the software components marketplace; i.e.
vendors of fine-granularity software components such as Stepstone (Objective-C),
Digitalk and ParcPlace systems (Smalltalk).

In the case of Stepstone, we build on the work of even-lower vendors, such
as Dec, Sun, etc for the operating system, kernel window systems (X Windows,
Presentation Manager, etc).

<- What *standards* were they produced to?  With what proof?
<- Will the "standard components" work together?  Again, with what proof?

See the concluding section of my IEEE Software paper, "Planning the Software
Industrial Revolution", particularly the discussion of specification/testing
languages and their use within Stepstone.
-- 

Brad Cox; cox@stepstone.com; CI$ 71230,647; 203 426 1875
The Stepstone Corporation; 75 Glen Road; Sandy Hook CT 06482