On 02/21/2014 07:35 AM, Steve Smith wrote:
To make this relevant to the discussion... I don't think I could ever have come to recognize the value of such a data structure if I *hadn't* felt obliged to re-invent (re-implement?) a number of algorithms that had already been implemented by others... to differing degrees of quality.
The meat of the discussion lies in the person's (or organization's) agility to change paths once prior work, or a better way regardless of its source, is brought to light. I recently had to characterize "agile" software development in comparison to ... what? ... "large-scale, entrenched process" to a CIO type who understands some of the economics, but not the technologies. Me being largely agnostic, trying to explain the two to him in an informal setting proved more difficult than I would have thought. (Shows how often I talk to those types these days.)
In microcosm, the contrast isn't between engineer-types and scientist-types, but between ... I don't know... authoritarian vs. egalitarian(?) types. I've met plenty of authoritarian scientist-types and plenty of egalitarian engineer-types. I've even met some certified PEs who showed remarkable agility when shown a better way. Actually, "better" is loaded. "More appropriate to the task at hand" is better than "better".
-- glen ep ropella -- 971-255-2847 ============================================================ FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
