Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!wuarchive!uunet!igor!rutabaga!jls From: jls@rutabaga.Rational.COM (Jim Showalter) Newsgroups: comp.software-eng Subject: Re: bridge building (was Re: Documenting OO Systems) Message-ID: Date: 24 Apr 91 21:50:00 GMT References: <33407@mimsy.umd.edu> Sender: news@Rational.COM Distribution: na Lines: 26 >The high level of human creativity in every software >enterprise as compared to the creativity involved in a static structure like >a bridge makes me (IMHO) confident you're comparing tomatoes and avocadoes. You miss my point--the high level of creativity required in software is due to our not yet having a clue how to make writing software more like building bridges. Bridge builders were undoubtedly VERY creative before there was any grasp of how to build bridges. >yet there are developers who play cowboy and ignore the >helpful work done by others. Exactly my point--and I believe this is BECAUSE they regard themselves as these creative geniuses who don't NEED discipline, science, etc, when in fact they're really sort of emotionally retarded wannabee artistes. >Either they suffer from NIH syndrome or are >simply ill informed. What can be done to reach the ill-informed practictioner? Large caliber handguns come to mind... -- * "Beyond 100,000 lines of code, you should probably be coding in Ada." * * - P.G. Plauger, Convener and Secretary of the ANSI C Committee * * * * The opinions expressed herein are my own. *