Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!uwm.edu!bbn.com!nic!nuhub!corwin!hkilov
From: hkilov@corwin.CCS.Northeastern.EDU (hiam kilov)
Newsgroups: comp.object
Subject: Re: OO vs. Information Engineering
Summary: object-oriented development
Keywords: MIS, OO, IE
Message-ID: <831@corwin.CCS.Northeastern.EDU>
Date: 10 Sep 90 18:17:10 GMT
References: <21730@grebyn.com> <5526@stpstn.UUCP>
Organization: College of Computer Science, Northeastern U., Boston
Lines: 47

A frequently asked question:

My interest in this is from an MIS management perspective.
Information Engineering (IE) (Finkelstein and Martin) is becoming
the development methodology of choice for most organizations.
Many of the Fortune 100 are spending millions on CASE tools in
support of these methods.  (In the latest issues of
ComputerWorld, both Ford and GE have recently signed multimillion
$$ agreements with CASE vendors for tools).  Information
Engineering experienced systems analysts command 5K to 15K higher
salaries than their non-IE peers due to the number of companies
trying to hire them.

OOD, as it stands today in what I see in the trade press, on
USENET, and in seminars, seems in no way as robust or as complete
as IE.  Tool support is diverse and complete for IE, from high
level business systems planning support clear to automated code
...

The answer is: "look at the keyword". The keyword in all of the above is
"tools". These silver bullets do not consider concepts, and -- evidently --
concepts are ahead of tools. Therefore there are problems with tools for o-o
development. However, it is possible to do o-o development using the best
tool in the world, i.e., your brains.

Look in the August issue (1990) of "Database programming and design". The
nice short article by W.Inmon (p.75-6) compares civil engineering and software
development. And I quote:

"Civil engineers recognize that tools are essential to do the job -- they
can't build the roads without bulldozers. They respect tools, but don't
make the mistake of thinking the tool is the solution. Information processing
professionals, however, continue to search for a panacea -- every time a new
tool appears in the marketplace, we hear that the solution has arrived..."
{Some good remarks about tool vendors deleted.}

As early as in 1976 E.W.Dijkstra has published a paper "The teaching of
programming, i.e., teaching of thinking". It would be nice not to forget at
least the title. And, of course, "programming" does not mean just "coding".

Happy programming!


<These opinions are my own and are not necessarily the opinions of Bellcore>

-Haim Kilov
haim@bcr.cc.bellcore.com