Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!sdd.hp.com!hplabs!hpfcso!hpfcmgw!gt
From: gt@hpfcmgw.HP.COM (George Tatge)
Newsgroups: comp.software-eng
Subject: Re: Development vs Engineering
Message-ID: <2450010@hpfcmgw.HP.COM>
Date: 15 Oct 90 16:46:22 GMT
References: <27696@bellcore.bellcore.com>
Organization: HP Fort Collins, CO
Lines: 29

>
>   ....
>>1. Since there can be no engineering without testing to insure that the
>>product is safe and reliable, a software engineer must have access to
>>test equipment and tools.
>
>Actually quite a bit of engineering is accomplished without testing.
>You rarely see testing of a bridge or building or dam, for example.
>Safety and reliability are achieved by analysis, modeling and simulation,
>inspection during construction, etc. I'd say that the jury is still out
>on which techniques will prove the most effective for software engineering.
>
>/Bill
>----------

Bill brings up a good point.  First, I'd have to say I overstated the 
case (unintentionally) and then add that I think Bill has also.  There
is some engineering that can NOT rely on testing, but this is in the 
minority.  I'd have to argue that the examples you used don't apply 
all that well.  For one thing, many of the "inspections" on large 
CE projects are made up of real tests of the subcomponents.  Core sampling
and testing of the concrete, etc.  Secondly, the bridge sustains heavy
amounts of testing during construction with the heavy equipment traffic
(it's not like they build a bridge and there is never one vehicle on it
until they open it for Monday rush hour!), the building is constantly
"tested" during construction and even the reservoir is (of necessity)
filled gradually.  .

gt