Are these all really true ?

Dear fellows.-
I recently downloaded and read an excellent synopsis about ECOOP-95 by Jan
Vitek.
/* URL -> http://cuiwww.unige.ch/OSG/Vitek/Publications/ecoop95trip.ps.gz */
Very interesting works are reported, but what really appealed me was a
reference to Dave Thomas' talk: `Experiences on the Road to Object Utopia',
particularly the part covering the validity of several academic
assumptions.
By years I have been teaching topics related to programming languages, OO
paradigm and software engineering. Of course I believe in what I teach, but
besides models can change (and improve) as time goes on, there are
occasions when I have the feeling that some assumptions are likely to be
true most of (but not all) the time and seem to be almost impossible to
sustain under certain scenarios. However as they seem the best model at
hand (in the mean), we keep using it (in spite of the sottovoce warnings).
As I think is worth opening a frank discussion about the validity of such
assumptions -or at least about some of them-, I am submitting you
(comp.compilers readers) Mr. Thomas' list of (could be) questionable
academic assumptions in the hope of know about your opinions and
propositions.


===== ACADEMIC ASSUMPTIONS - ARE THESE ALL REALLY TRUE ? ======
* Strongly type language result in better programs.
* Performance is a language problem.
* Compilation is better than interpretation.
* Memory is free, speed is what is worth optimizing.
* Multi-threading is better than single threading.
* Specification and design can be performed with no knowledge of implementation.
* Programming, testing, packaging are easy, design is hard.
* Formal specifications yield correct programs.
* Applications contain a substantial number of algorithms.
* Industry uses ... C++, CORBA, Windows, UNIX, ...
* Industry has better or worse tools.
* Industry runs on wrong hardware and software platforms.
* WYSIWYG is better for all applications.


Thank you and best regards


Gabriela O. de Vivo
gdevivo@conicit.ve
--

Return to the comp.compilers page.
Search the comp.compilers archives again.