Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!ucbvax!agate!helios.ee.lbl.gov!ncis.tis.llnl.gov!lll-winken!uunet!mcvax!ukc!acorn!moncam!paul From: paul@moncam.co.uk (Paul Hudson) Newsgroups: comp.software-eng Subject: Re: software engineers Summary: There are differences between bridges and programs. Message-ID: <192@marvin.moncam.co.uk> Date: 11 May 89 13:19:23 GMT References: <854@odyssey.ATT.COM> <1320@ruuinf.cs.ruu.nl> Organization: Monotype ADG, Cambridge, UK Lines: 30 There is a difference between civil engineering projects like bridge building and large programming projects. Even though the bridge may fail, when it does it's regarded as the fault of the civil engineer, and contracts often specify that any fixing of failures should be paid for by the civil engineer, and even that other financial consequences of the failure such as damages should also be the responisbility. This works because the likelihod of failure is reasonably low. Contrast this with a software project. Not only do many fail (most? according to a previous posting), but the suppliers oftne do not guarantee it's continued operation and charge "maintenance" for fixing bugs and errors in the programs. The aim of software engineering (and formal methods) as I see it is to reduce the chance of failure to the point where a software company can guarantee it's product will work according to the spec. and if it doesn't fixes are included in the contract price, such price to be roughly in line with current prices, and below current prices + projected maintenance costs. Paul Hudson MAIL: Monotype ADG, Science Park, Cambridge, CB4 4FQ, UK. PHONE: +44 (223) 420018 EMAIL: paul@moncam.co.uk, ;" FAX: +44 (223) 420911 ...!ukc!acorn!moncam!paul `"";";" "/dev/null full: please empty the bit bucket" -- Paul Hudson MAIL: Monotype ADG, Science Park, Cambridge, CB4 4FQ, UK. PHONE: +44 (223) 420018 EMAIL: paul@moncam.co.uk, ;" FAX: +44 (223) 420911 ...!ukc!acorn!moncam!paul `"";";" "/dev/null full: please empty the bit bucket"