home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Path: sparky!uunet!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!darwin.sura.net!paladin.american.edu!news.univie.ac.at!hp4at!mcsun!uknet!brunel!cs89nnj
- From: cs89nnj@brunel.ac.uk (Nina Joshi)
- Newsgroups: comp.theory
- Subject: damsel in distress over comp. theory
- Message-ID: <BzL4E7.3Bv@brunel.ac.uk>
- Date: 21 Dec 92 01:06:06 GMT
- Organization: Brunel University, Uxbridge, UK
- Lines: 24
- X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL8]
-
- I studied software and hardware standards and practices in a unit and have come
- to the conclusion that most are too idealistic. The assumption prevalent in
- most computing theory is that it is possible to maintain an engineering
- standard....it isn't unless enforced....a car can be built in a large
- production plant in one way, leaving less room to mess up the production
- stage...however, software can be designed and constructed in umpteen number of
- ways and unless a guideline is adhered to, the end product may be an
- inefficient piece of junk...
-
- I am not revering standards in all situations, but they would help maintain
- consistency in software production and use...I am currently undertaking a
- consultancy project with a large firm. The chaos is apparent, and to recommend
- standards for use of the software seems to be too optimistic. The particular
- section I am dealing with needs to be recommended practical, realistic
- standards, applicable in a workshop...
-
- Any ideas??
- --
- ***********************************
- * Nina Joshi *
- * at Brunel University *
- * doing Applied Computer Systems *
- * *
- * But I don't know why!! *
-