Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!usc!wuarchive!uunet!munnari.oz.au!manuel!ccadfa!ghm
From: ghm@ccadfa.adfa.oz.au (Geoff Miller)
Newsgroups: comp.software-eng
Subject: Re: Art vs. Engineering
Keywords: Engineering, Art, science, software
Message-ID: <2398@ccadfa.adfa.oz.au>
Date: 20 May 91 03:47:48 GMT
References: <1991May13.181826.18832@hellgate.utah.edu> <1336@grapevine.EBay.Sun.COM> <1991May16.231300.13345@casbah.acns.nwu.edu>
Organization: Computer Centre, University College, UNSW, ADFA, Canberra, Australia
Lines: 26

tsarver@andersen.uucp (Tom Sarver) writes:

>Hey guys,
>This thread is getting a little tiresome....

Actually I was finding it quite interesting!

[...interesting references deleted 'cause I haven't read them yet...]
>Whoever does software engineering is a craftsman with different freedoms
>and constraints.  No one can determine unequivocally that a piece of
>software is "right" or "wrong."

True.  In fact, for almost any computing problem there is a potentially
infinite number of solutions (most of which are so obviously sub-optimal that
we never consciously consider them at all), but even when we come up with a
good solution it is very hard to demonstrate that it is the "best" solution  -
not least because there are several ways to define "best".

It is this lack of a clear single "right" solution which distinguishes 
computing from a science, but maybe emphasising the creative and "artistic"
nature is not the way to go either.  I'm reminded of the title of Dijkstra's
book, however, and maybe we should just stick with that  -  A "Discipline"
of Programming.

Geoff Miller  (ghm@cc.adfa.oz.au)
Computer Centre, Australian Defence Force Academy