SCOUG-Programming Mailing List Archives

<< Previous Message << >> Next Message >>

Date:	Sun, 4 Jan 2004 14:38:50 PST8
From:	"Gregory W. Smith" <gsmith@well.com >
Reply-To:	scoug-programming@scoug.com
To:	scoug-programming@scoug.com
Subject:	SCOUG-Programming: QA equals testing, Part One:Detection

Content Type: text/plain

Lynn H. Maxson wrote:
> Greg,
>
> I wish that you had written your code example using PL/I
> syntax which SL/I uses. At this point I have considerable
> difficulty with deciding whether you don't believe SQL works
> or you don't understand how it works. In an SQL query with
> the general three-clause form of "SELECT column(s) FROM
> table(s) WHERE condition(s);", only in the SELECT clause does
> the order of the columns matter and there only to the author.
> The tables in the FROM clause and the conditions in the
> WHERE clause can appear in any order.

Replace the word "specification" in what I wrote with as
much PL/I syntax as you want. I think my point still holds.
It is not a case of "belief" in SQL. It is a byproduct of
my background that SOME things HAVE to be done in order.

> ....
>
> The fact that you don't have to impose a
> physical-equals-logical order on the source code means you
> can write it as it occurs to you in stream of consciousness
> mode. ...

I LOVE steam-of-consciousness. It is really great with the
academic types outside science and engineering. I can sling
the stream-of-consciousness with the best of them. And the
real feeling of accomplishment comes when I weave something
Pythonesque that gets accepted as profound.

(Steam-of-consciousness moment about my statement above that
SOME things HAVE to be done in order. Stream-of-consciousness
dressing in the morning: 1) Shoes, 2) Socks, 3) Pants, 4) Boxer
Shorts, 5) T-Shirt, 6) Neck Tie, and 7) Dress shirt. Yeah,
That's the ticket.)

> ...
>
> It would seem that that you resent the fact that logic
> programming works, that SQL works, that Prolog works, that
> AI works, that they go directly from specs to executable with
> unordered input...except for the order of the SELECT, FROM,
> and WHERE clauses in SQL. They all use an HLL. They all
> simultaneously function as specification and programming
> languages.

I do not "resent" logic programming, SQL, Prolog, or AI.
(Steam-of-consciousness moment thanks to Woody Allen who
failed metaphysics: He got cheating for looking into the
soul of the boy next to him during a test.) Yes, HLL such
as SQL and Prolog work for your "problem set" where your
data is represented by a finite set. And the records in
a data base are FINITE in number.

I have yet to understand how your methodology maps to any
representation of what I expect computers to do for me with
MY typical problem sets. In the most general terms, I want
to compute useful measurements from scalar, vector, or tensor
functions over some specified region in phase space.

(Stream of consciousness moment listening to internet radio
right now as Michael Medved interviews a "Professor of Critical
Thinking" who declares that "There are no absolutes." Sounds
like a rather definitive statement to me. At least it sounded
definitive until a few additional questions prompted a bunch of
stream-of-consciousness baffle-gab from the Professor.)

Very simple example: One dimensional phase space on the real
line with a function representing potential energy (of an
object) as a function of displacement along the real axis.
Compute the work to displace the object from position x to
to position y. Note that the intervals [x,y] and [F(x),F(y)]
both contain Aleph(0) data points.

(Stream of consciousness moment: When on death ground, fight
-- Sun Tsu. Prompted by seeing Return of the King yesterday.)

Practical example: A phase space on the complex plane maps the
open loop frequency response of a dynamic process, G(j omega).
Determine the range of gains that assure stability when the loop
is closed.

Golly Gee. I used to teach my students in process control
Theorems about linear systems so that they could apply such
concepts correctly. You know about theorems: given specified
axioms and previously proven theorems, you work through things
logically step-by-step to show that your result follows.
(Stream of consciousness moment--Don't forget the Lemmas!!)

Theorems--What a concept. Now I just have to learn how to
use stream-of-consciousness specification to prove the Central
Limit Theorem. That will go a long way to showing me how to
apply this whole new method of software development. Or maybe
Lynn can demonstrate how random specification can prove the
Goldbach conjecture. We need to elevate the conjecture to a
true Theorem.

(Stream of consciousness moment: I wonder if anyone finds these
steam-of-consciousness digressions annoying. BE annoyed. The
country needs more Noyeds.)

Final example: Determine the lift, drag, energy transfer,
and torque for a mixing impeller in a tank of water. In this
case, the EXACT specification is given by 1) the Navier-Stokes
equations, 2) No-Slip boundary conditions at the stationary
and moving surfaces, 3) Rheological constitutive equations,
and 4) an equation of state for the fluid.

(Stream of consciousness moment: Nobody expects the Spanish
Inquisition. Our chief weapon is fear and surprise.....
Our TWO chief weapons are fear, surprise, an almost fanatical
devotion to .....
Our THREE chief weapons are fear, surprise, and almost fanatical
devotion to the Pope, a ruthless effi......
Our FOUR chief weapons ..... )
--
Gregory W. Smith (WD9GAY) gsmith@well.com

=====================================================

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".

=====================================================

Return to [ 04 | January | 2004 ]

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.