Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!decvax!duke!unc!mcnc!ncsu!fostel
From: fostel@ncsu.UUCP
Newsgroups: net.lang
Subject: RE: Flaw Charts
Message-ID: <2332@ncsu.UUCP>
Date: Thu, 15-Sep-83 08:49:08 EDT
Article-I.D.: ncsu.2332
Posted: Thu Sep 15 08:49:08 1983
Date-Received: Thu, 15-Sep-83 15:04:32 EDT
Lines: 37



    Well, I think the use of the term "flaw" chart was clear, consise and
    hard to mis-understand sarcasm.  I can understand that some readers would
    have trouble though.  Some time ago on the net, I wrote a blatently
    tongue-in-cheek item (on address spaces) and was mis-understood and
    held up for ridicule (by another netter) for my ludicrous technical
    opinions.  A subsequent item introduced itself with the declaration
    "BEGIN Joke", and of course then failed to use "ekoJ NIGEB".  Now,
    this is not a Joke:  I really think the problem lies with the readers
    as much or more so than the writers.  Its a sad commentary on the
    linguistic skills of our readership (and writership) that we need to
    use formal techniques to identify humor and any but blunt expository
    form.  Funny how all the writers over the centuries have managed to
    convey wit embedded in the writing without red flags to help out the
    reader when a bit-o-wit is comming.  Hang your heads in shame net-land.

    ----

    On the same subject, someone criticsed the use of flow charts as being
    low level, compared to wonderful C.  Now, I know it is possible that
    that was a joke.  But I fear it was not.  Flow charts do indeed contain
    gotos, but they do it via a 2-d medium which allows it to work out very
    nicely with a bit of care.  I think that most flow charters in the world
    do it very poorly, and this has lead to a number of "structured" flow
    chart methodologies, such as HIPO charts.  As with all the other modern
    techniques, this is successful in direct proportion to the skill of the
    user, not the qualities of the methodology.  Proper use of visual design
    and documentation aids is one of the more serious problems in our industry
    (right after inability to read or write english witisisms) and SHOULD
    be receiving serious attention from us.  These funny devices we all use
    to generate 95% of our technical material have a strong bias against any
    non-linguistic constructs.  TWe should try to rise above the limitations
    of the medium.  When Fortran was ugly we didn't abandon programming langs
    we tried to make them better.  Flaw charts tend to be ugly to -- so we
    should try to figure out why, and how to do it better. Pict. worth 1000 ...
    ----GaryFostel----