Xref: utzoo comp.software-eng:5388 comp.object:3237
Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!think.com!mintaka!bloom-beacon!eru!kth.se!sunic!mcsun!ukc!mucs!logitek!grep!frank
From: frank@grep.co.uk (Frank Wales)
Newsgroups: comp.software-eng,comp.object
Subject: Re: How to pay for reusable software
Message-ID: <1991Apr16.132542.7120@grep.co.uk>
Date: 16 Apr 91 13:25:42 GMT
References: <1991Apr3.231849.13410@m.cs.uiuc.edu> <3318:Apr705:51:2391@kramden.acf.nyu.edu> <1991Apr12.182420.18587@m.cs.uiuc.edu> <291@dumbcat.sf.ca.us> <12676@pucc.Princeton.EDU>
Reply-To: frank@grep.co.uk (Frank Wales)
Organization: Grep Limited, LEEDS, UK
Lines: 46

In article <12676@pucc.Princeton.EDU> EGNILGES@pucc.Princeton.EDU writes:
>We badly need a "Programmer's Desk Reference." 

I'd love one.  Thanks for offering to put it together. ;-)

>However, in the existing world, such a tool is not likely to be made
>available.  This is because although some company can publish such a
>book, PART of the authoritative nature of the Physician's Desk Reference
>was the willingness of physicians and the public to accept it as a
>neutral authority.  I claim that any company publishing a Programmer's
>Desk Reference will be perceived as biased towards some way of developing
>software even if it does not have a bias.

I think this fear is overstated; I'd lay you money that aromatherapy,
homeopathy and other fringe stuff don't feature large as recommended
treatments in the PDR.  There's as much a mainstream in medicine as
in software, although software's is maybe more Mississippi-like.

An alternative example is the position of Encyclopaedia Britannica
as the canonical general knowledge reference; it has its biases and
problems, but it's still tremendously valuable nonetheless.

>Perhaps the excellent programmer of the future will be a skilled
>reinventor of the wheel, able to create libraries from the ground
>up in the manner of a barn-raising on the frontier.

I do hope not; I've written enough low-level bootstrap code for
n lifetimes already.  Don't ask about list and table stuff. :-(

>Perhaps she will be assisted by programming languages
>powerful enough to do this, and the benefit will be that she won't
>have to worry about reusing someone else's bugs.

Any re-invention must include re-inventing bugs; unless you're
advocating the Holy Grail of programming languages, so "powerful"
(do you mean expressive?) it prevents you from writing wrong programs.
[I don't think you are -- I'm just checking :-).]

>But skilled programmers are skilled at BOTH reusing code
>AND creating reusable libraries: not just the former.

Definitely.  The twin legacy of good programming is both useful
approaches to development and useful code for re-use.
--
Frank Wales, Grep Limited,             [frank@grep.co.uk<->uunet!grep!frank]
Kirkfields Business Centre, Kirk Lane, LEEDS, UK, LS19 7LX. (+44) 532 500303