Carl,

>Even in the olden days coding was only about 10 percent of total effort.

But it's 90% of the fun and I don't see how any theory of programming
can be taken seriously unless personal enjoyment is taken into account.

>So if the goal is better quality software, then the better psychological question
>to study is why programmers reject proven formal techniques and continue their
>brute force and awkwardness ways believing they can intellectually overcome

It all depends on how you measure "better quality software".  If this
is measured in terms of shareholder value (of the company who wrote
the software) then a better psychological question would be why do people
continue to promote formal techniques when they have been shown to
increase costs (you need to take into account the higher startup costs of
projects that are cancelled, this figure is higher than the cost savings later
on those projects that are not cancelled)?

How do we know that the techniques being used today are not the
best ones?  I remember seeing a report on the year 2000 problem
that calculated the best way of dealing with the problem (ie, cheapest).
Ignore it for as long as possible came out as the winner (which is
exactly what most companies did).  The cost of addressing the issue
in programs that would not be used after the year 2000 being the most
significant factor.  The best way of finding out which programs were not
needed after 2000 being to wait and see.

Without statistically significant empirical studies all this theorising is
pointless.

derek

--
Derek M Jones                                           tel: +44 (0) 1252 520 667
Knowledge Software Ltd                            mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Applications Standards Conformance Testing   http://www.knosof.co.uk
 
----------------------------------------------------------------------
PPIG Discuss List ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Discuss admin: http://limitlessmail.net/mailman/listinfo/discuss
Announce admin: http://limitlessmail.net/mailman/listinfo/announce
PPIG Discuss archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/discuss%40ppig.org/

Reply via email to