Ed - (01)
On Jan 21, 2010, at 7:45 PM, Ed Barkmeyer wrote: (02)
> [EB] good science owes much to the peer review process. (03)
(At the risk of perhaps repeating myself...) (04)
Twenty years ago I was poking around the (MIT) Sloan School's library
for materials relevant to information management issues. (05)
To my delight & astonishment I found a research paper on "software
maintenance." (06)
Unfortunately when I got the paper the full abstract said that while
the original intent was to discuss software maintenance issues, when
they examined the academically acceptable refereed literature, there
were in fact so few articles on the topic that the paper was actually
going to examine how object oriented programming would significantly
reduce/eliminate the need for software maintenance. (07)
To me this smacks of: "Because my eyes can only see visible light,
this is proof that radio waves do not exist. QED" (08)
Let me see... object oriented programming (or modular programming if
you're from the other side of the pond) is 50+ years old. Therefore
we clearly have no software maintenance challenges now? (09)
Did I miss something? (010)
- David (011)
_________________________________________________________________
Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/
Config Subscr: http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontolog-forum/
Unsubscribe: mailto:ontolog-forum-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/
Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/
To join: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?WikiHomePage#nid1J
To Post: mailto:ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (012)
|