[opensource] RESOLVE

Aaron Joseph bonesawosu at gmail.com
Mon Feb 9 11:16:59 EST 2009


I could see how the requires and ensures clauses could be useful... but they
require the use of the cryptic math definitions to actually do them. So
although the idea is somewhat on the right track, it goes about
accomplishing it the wrong way. I agree with Tyler that it's something that
is nice to be exposed to, but maybe for a much shorter period of time. They
spend 1 day talking about object oriented design but spend 3 quarters
talking about this design-by-contract idea. That is just a backwards way of
doing things.

I'm reading these posts and trying to get an understanding of why they teach
us stuff that isn't actually used in the real world. And so far, like Tyler,
I have yet to see any good reason why they must teach us the things they do.
Are they preparing us for the real world or just forcing their research
ideas on us because the real world hasn't adopted them? What exactly are
students getting out of this course? Sure you learn important concepts that
are important for programmers to know, but what should a student think about
most of the focus being stuff related to Bruce Weide's research and not on
useful knowledge? Does funding play any role in their decision? Does resolve
possibly bring in funding for the department? Would switching to Java take
money away from the reusable software research group? Would using a more
popular language really make it all that much harder for students to learn
the concepts? I would really like to understand why it is so hard to
convince the department to switch to a more useful language. I also wanted
to try to throw some more wood on the fire so that we can keep this good
discussion going!





--Aaron Joseph





>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mail.cse.ohio-state.edu/mailman/private/opensource/attachments/20090209/c791b512/attachment.html


More information about the Opensource mailing list