!Re: Nuke Redmond!

From: Richard Erlacher <edick_at_idcomm.com>
Date: Sat Apr 8 16:57:28 2000

I couldn't resist . . . see below, plz.


----- Original Message -----
From: Mike Cheponis <mac_at_Wireless.Com>
To: <classiccmp_at_classiccmp.org>
Sent: Saturday, April 08, 2000 12:04 PM
Subject: Re: !Re: Nuke Redmond!

> On Sat, 8 Apr 2000, Sean 'Captain Napalm' Conner wrote:
> >...
> > Not to be outdone, it was an American Professor who, when asked what
> > to do if you don't know how to handle an error, was to simply not
> > check for the error.
> Clearly, this American Professor writes code for Linux! ;-)

Why not? That's how NASA handles them!

> > Then there's the code I've had to work with. Simple unmaintainable
> > messes. It's gotten to the point where I don't want to even be
> > considered in the same profession as these people.
> >
> > So, the sample size might be too small. But a friend of mine works
> > with European programmers (he's American), along with American
> > programmers. The Americans just can't program period (there are a
> > few exceptions), while the Europeans can, but they love (and he's
> > quoted them on this) making it complex, for whatever reason (and
> > again, there are a few exceptions).
> This observation completely agrees with mine. I would make the further
> that American programmers who make complex code do not understand
> software engineering, either (with a few exceptions).
> The major reason for this is that most people are not suited to be
> software engineers. There are fewer people suited than there are
> opportunities for software engineers. Ergo: Problem.
> When computers were young, mathematicians tended to program them. They
> tended to be relatively careful programmers.
> Yet, the general level of software engineering up through the, say,
> early 80s was not all that great. (Take a look at some of that old code,
> and I think you'll find that the standards today have risen as to what
> we consider to be "good code" - and most of that old stuff doesn't rise
> to those levels.)
> So, compounded with needing more software engineers, the level of
> acceptable quality has risen. Therefore, today, your average piece of
> software is garbage (with exceptions, of course!).
> -mac
Received on Sat Apr 08 2000 - 16:57:28 BST

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Fri Oct 10 2014 - 23:32:40 BST