said:
>Now I thought we agreed at the SCOUG meeting that a "smart" editor could
>immediately detect syntax and semantic errors
Not quite. All I agreed is that a smart editor could catch some small
subset of the semantic errors.
>Here we assume that he who wrote the source understands
>what he has written. He needs some feedback that the logic he wrote has
>the intended effect. He needs then test data. Once more he faces a
>writing effort. As always when
>interested in productivity he seeks the minimal effort to
>achieve the maximum results.
History shows the best person to generate test data is someone other than
the programmer that wrote the code. It's the more eyes principal at work
again.
>Last time I checked Linus Torvalds offered the first Linux
>kernel in 1992, some ten years or so ago.
That sounds about right. Of course, at that time it was not intended to
be used in commercial environments. These goals came several years later.
>To date it hardly matches
>OS/2 in server and client performance or functions.
Each has it's strengths. A large percentage servers in the ISP world are
running Linux. There's a reason for this.
>It still lacks
>anything the equal of PM or WPS.
That's only because there's not sufficient interest. JFS support appeared
almost immediately once interest existed. Same for USB support. Same for
WinXX-like user interfaces. :-(
>The sad lesson of IBM's expensive venture with AD/Cycle was not that it
>couldn't work, but living with the economic and competitive consequences
>of having something that did. The only profit for success accrued to
>the user, his productivity. If the only value (profit) lay in the tool
>use, not in its
>manufacture, then only the tool user can profit in funding its
>manufacture. Of course, in doing this the tool becomes the property of
>the user. The user becomes his own vendor.
Huh?
>On top of that if we have a
>"known" defect how is it that our correcting ability cannot maintain
>pace with our detecting?
Defects are not known until detected.
When you have 1000's of detector, it's easy to understand how they stay
ahead of the correctors. Again, the many-eyes paradigm at work.
>A prototype is a demonstration of feasibility. You show
>examples of functional capability. I offered these from "real world"
>tools.
Well, you are going to have to try to explain it another way. I don't see
it based on what you have said so far.
Steven
--
---------------------------------------------------------------------
"Steven Levine" MR2/ICE 2.35 #10183 Warp4/FP15/14.085_W4
www.scoug.com irc.webbnet.org #scoug (Wed 7pm PST)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
=====================================================
To unsubscribe from this list, send an email message
to "steward@scoug.com". In the body of the message,
put the command "unsubscribe scoug-programming".
For problems, contact the list owner at
"rollin@scoug.com".
=====================================================
<< Previous Message <<
>> Next Message >>
Return to [ 19 |
February |
2003 ]
The Southern California OS/2 User Group
P.O. Box 26904
Santa Ana, CA 92799-6904, USA
Copyright 2001 the Southern California OS/2 User Group. ALL RIGHTS
RESERVED.
SCOUG, Warp Expo West, and Warpfest are trademarks of the Southern California OS/2 User Group.
OS/2, Workplace Shell, and IBM are registered trademarks of International
Business Machines Corporation.
All other trademarks remain the property of their respective owners.
