As the holiday weekend winds down, the list of the worlds 500 fastest supercomputers has once again been updated. Since 1993 the list has been updated twice a year, and the world has watched as nations and corporations compete to move ahead and stay ahead of the competition. Publicity occasionally accompanies a major technology leap; but normally the updates go by without much fanfare.
There are many books you can get if you want to learn to program in C++ and Java. There are books about how to perform software design for business, how to develop embedded systems, and how to develop complex algorithms; but what if you want to write high-assurance software using object-oriented techniques? We’ve got a resource for you.
The so-called experts will tell you it can’t be done; it is not possible to create bug-free software, at least at low-cost for a non-trivial application. Now it seems, we have our first documented case of ostensibly zero-defect software.
Continue reading “Correctness by Construction: Praxis Scores!” »
I just finished reading Steve McConnell’s Professional Software Development: Shorter Schedules, Higher Quality Products, More Successful Projects, Enhanced Careers. This is not a book about languages, software design, or coding techniques. It is a book about being a software professional, and about managing and leading software professionals. It is a book about the state of software development as a profession, and about what we should aspire for it to become. All that, and it is an interesting read.
Continue reading “Professional Software Development – A Book Review” »
Like many veteran software developers, I am sold on the value of defensive programming. It seems that no matter how thorough the requirements, nor how good the design, things can go wrong; and I’d like my code to be able to handle it. So imagine my surprise when no less than a DER provided me with a perfectly valid and well-reasoned argument to discard defensive programming techniques altogether.
After my oh-so-recent review of Best Kept Secrets of Peer Code Review, I followed up with the author to inform him of the review. I also took the opportunity to tell him that I disagree with him on a few points, not the least of which is the concept that finding a larger number of defects is good. His reply was gracious, and I hope to have an opportunity to further discuss some of these points with him. Meanwhile, I was inspired to carry on my rant here on the home front.
