Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!uakari.primate.wisc.edu!aplcen!boingo.med.jhu.edu!haven.umd.edu!mimsy!jogger.cs.umd.edu!straub
From: straub@jogger.cs.umd.edu (Pablo A. Straub)
Newsgroups: comp.software-eng
Subject: Re: Modifiability
Message-ID: <35461@mimsy.umd.edu>
Date: 11 Jun 91 14:12:53 GMT
References: <1991Jun11.004620.3157@netcom.COM>
Sender: news@mimsy.umd.edu
Reply-To: straub@cs.umd.edu (Pablo A. Straub)
Distribution: comp.software-eng
Organization: U. of Maryland, Dept. of Computer Science, College Park, MD 20742
Lines: 16

In article <1991Jun11.004620.3157@netcom.COM> Jim Showalter writes:
> [... on the problem of designing performance vs. tuning performace]
>
>One of the reasons I'm such a strong proponent of languages and tools that
>allow a rigorous specification of interfaces (at various levels of scale,
>including the subsystem level) is that such interfaces tend to focus one's
>attention on that which is essential at that particular level of detail.
>(This is nothing radical--it's the fundamental basis for abstraction...)

I agree.  Of course, the only way to specify rigorously an interface is
using a language in which both syntax and semantics are unambiguosly
specified.  That is, formal specifications are a must.

>**************** JIM SHOWALTER, jls@netcom.com, (408) 243-0630 ***************

Pablo Straub, straub@cs.umd.edu