Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!rutgers!seismo!lll-crg!mordor!sri-spam!sri-unix!hplabs!sdcrdcf!burdvax!psuvax1!psuvm.bitnet!uh2
From: uh2@psuvm.bitnet.UUCP
Newsgroups: comp.edu
Subject: Re: portable code
Message-ID: <8691UH2@PSUVM>
Date: Mon, 24-Nov-86 12:28:01 EST
Article-I.D.: PSUVM.8691UH2
Posted: Mon Nov 24 12:28:01 1986
Date-Received: Fri, 28-Nov-86 01:44:18 EST
References: <653@moscom.UUCP> <569@hoptoad.uucp> <11569@watnot.UUCP> <8612V6M@PSUVM> 495@brl-sem.ARPA
Lines: 24


In article <495@brl-sem.ARPA>, ron@brl-sem.ARPA (Ron Natalie <ron>) says:

>In article <8612V6M@PSUVM>, V6M@PSUVM.BITNET writes:
>> <>
>> Let me clarify my position.
>> 1.  I teach MIS & DP courses mostly, so I don't assign problems whose
>>     solutions are input to the sucessful completion of a project.
>> 2.  DP/MIS shops run on the theory of "get it working...
>
>This "DP/MIS" approach will get shops into trouble in todays market place.
>If a competetive environment and the advent of UNIX, you can expect the next
>slicko computer that the company buys is not going to be architecturily
>comapatible with the current one.  The problems are magnified if you are
>actually in the SOFTWARE business where your programs are expected to work
>on UNIXs of many hardware flavors.
>
>-Ron

I agree entirely.  The entire point of modern Software Engineering is to
produce working software with the cheapest long-range cost.  The "DP/MIS"
approach will lose in the long run.

lee