Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!allegra!mit-eddie!think!harvard!seismo!rochester!ritcv!rocksvax!rocksanne!sunybcs!ellie!colonel
From: colonel@ellie.UUCP (Col. G. L. Sicherman)
Newsgroups: net.cse
Subject: Re: portable code
Message-ID: <868@ellie.UUCP>
Date: Fri, 7-Mar-86 12:21:43 EST
Article-I.D.: ellie.868
Posted: Fri Mar  7 12:21:43 1986
Date-Received: Wed, 12-Mar-86 01:40:42 EST
References: <653@moscom.UUCP> <569@hoptoad.uucp> <1149@mit-eddie.UUCP>
Organization: A-1 Mosquito Farms
Lines: 22
Summary: comparing bridges to programs?!

["You saved my life, Captain Buffalo!  Have a CIGAR!"]

In article <1149@mit-eddie.UUCP>, gds@mit-eddie.UUCP (Greg Skinner) writes:
> I am not going to include any of Laura's text, because I think she
> made some very good points.  ...
> Laura states that good civil engineers build bridges that last > 10
> years, good architects build houses that don't fall, etc.  There is a
> major difference between those professions and the software industry.
> Those professions have been around for centuries!  The techniques
> involved in building robust structures are well understood, ...

There's a deeper reason.  Bridges and houses are _permanent_ structures;
they're built to last.  Most programs are are more or less ad-hoc.  The
problems they're designed to solve go away, or change, and the programs
have to be scrapped or rewritten.  It's part of the cultural transition
from HARD-ware to SOFT-ware: with electronic communication, we don't
need permanent structures--anywhere!
-- 
Col. G. L. Sicherman
UU: ...{rocksvax|decvax}!sunybcs!colonel
CS: colonel@buffalo-cs
BI: csdsicher@sunyabva