Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
More thoughts of Niklaus Wirth..
17 views
Skip to first unread message
Amine Moulay Ramdane
Oct 7, 2020, 2:54:02 PM10/7/20
to
Hello..
More thoughts of Niklaus Wirth..
Read the following thoughts of Niklaus Wirth
(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Niklaus_Wirth):
Niklaus Wirth said:
""Good enough software" is rarely good enough. It is a sad manifestation of the spirit of modern times, in which an individual's pride in his/her work has become rare. The idea that one might derive satisfaction from his or her successful work, because that work is ingenious, beautiful, or just pleasing, has become ridiculed. Nothing but economic success and monetary reward is acceptable. Hence our occupations have become mere jobs. But quality of work can be expected only through personal satisfaction, dedication and enjoyment. In our profession, precision and perfection are not a dispensible luxury, but a simple necessity.
Software development is technical activity conducted by human beings. It is no secret that human beings suffer from imperfection, limited reliability, and impatience - among other things. Add to it that they have become demanding, which leads to the request for rapid, high performance in return for the requested high salaries. Work under constant time pressure, however, results in unsatisfactory, faulty products. Generally, the hope is that corrections will not only be easy, because software is immaterial, but that the custormers will be willing to share the cost. We know of much better ways to design software than is common practice, but they are rarely followed. I know of a particular, very large software producer that explicitly assumes that design takes 20% of developers' time, and debugging takes 80% . Although internal advoctates of an 80% design time vs. 20% debugging time have not only proven that their ratio is realistic, but also that it would improve the company's tarnished image. Why, then, is the 20% design time approach preferred? Because with 20% design time your product is on the market earlier than that of a competitor consuming 80% design time. And surveys show that the customer at large considers a shaky but early product as more attractive than a later product, even if it is stable and mature. Who is to blame for this state of affairs? The programmer turned hacker; the manager under time pressure; the business man compelled to extol profit wherever possible; or the customer believing in promised miracles?"
Read more here:
http://www.eptacom.net/pubblicazioni/pub_eng/wirth.html
Thank you,
Amine Moulay Ramdane.
More thoughts of Niklaus Wirth..
Read the following thoughts of Niklaus Wirth
(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Niklaus_Wirth):
Niklaus Wirth said:
""Good enough software" is rarely good enough. It is a sad manifestation of the spirit of modern times, in which an individual's pride in his/her work has become rare. The idea that one might derive satisfaction from his or her successful work, because that work is ingenious, beautiful, or just pleasing, has become ridiculed. Nothing but economic success and monetary reward is acceptable. Hence our occupations have become mere jobs. But quality of work can be expected only through personal satisfaction, dedication and enjoyment. In our profession, precision and perfection are not a dispensible luxury, but a simple necessity.
Software development is technical activity conducted by human beings. It is no secret that human beings suffer from imperfection, limited reliability, and impatience - among other things. Add to it that they have become demanding, which leads to the request for rapid, high performance in return for the requested high salaries. Work under constant time pressure, however, results in unsatisfactory, faulty products. Generally, the hope is that corrections will not only be easy, because software is immaterial, but that the custormers will be willing to share the cost. We know of much better ways to design software than is common practice, but they are rarely followed. I know of a particular, very large software producer that explicitly assumes that design takes 20% of developers' time, and debugging takes 80% . Although internal advoctates of an 80% design time vs. 20% debugging time have not only proven that their ratio is realistic, but also that it would improve the company's tarnished image. Why, then, is the 20% design time approach preferred? Because with 20% design time your product is on the market earlier than that of a competitor consuming 80% design time. And surveys show that the customer at large considers a shaky but early product as more attractive than a later product, even if it is stable and mature. Who is to blame for this state of affairs? The programmer turned hacker; the manager under time pressure; the business man compelled to extol profit wherever possible; or the customer believing in promised miracles?"
Read more here:
http://www.eptacom.net/pubblicazioni/pub_eng/wirth.html
Thank you,
Amine Moulay Ramdane.
0 new messages