Coupling and cohesion are *somewhat* useful concepts outside of programming. But the SE jargonal subclasses are not. And even the upper terms coupling and cohesion are not the most useful ways to have this discussion. They're simply more jargonal, biased terms that dorks use to blind the normies ... to tell inside jokes. The more natural language in which to frame modularity in biology (writ large, from micro to macro) is information theoretic, which still allows dorks to tell their inside jokes. But it's much more expressive and universal.
On 8/18/20 8:24 AM, Prof David West wrote: > Much more interesting question would be your opinion of using > coupling/cohesion typologies as metaphors in realms outside of programming. -- ↙↙↙ uǝlƃ - .... . -..-. . -. -.. -..-. .. ... -..-. .... . .-. . FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6 bit.ly/virtualfriam un/subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/ FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/
