What's Wrong With Formal Programming Methods?
نویسنده
چکیده
The January 1991 issue of Computing Research News includes the headline Formal Software Design Methods Next Step In Improving Quality, with an excellent article by Dick Kieburtz [0] explaining the advantage to industry of taking this step. The trouble is: it's been the next step for ten years! In May 1982 Tony Hoare [1] made the same argument very persuasively: software engineering is not worthy of the name, certainly is not a profession, until it is based on scientific principles and is practiced with the same degree of precision as other professional engineering. Since then, formal methods have been learned and used by a few companies in Europe, though it is not yet known how successfully (people are always ready to claim success for their latest efforts). In North America, formal methods have hardly made a start. Why such a poor showing for something so highly recommended?
منابع مشابه
Multiparadigm Programming in Oz
The foundation of Prolog's success is the high abstraction level of its declarative subset, namely rst-order Horn clause logic with SLDNF resolution. What's missing from Prolog is that little attempt is made to give the same foundation to anything outside the declarative subset. We argue that multiparadigmprogramming can remedy this lack. We give a foundation for multiparadigmprogramming and we...
متن کاملFormal Methods Adoption: What's Working, What's Not!
Drawing from the author’s twenty years of experience in formal methods research and development, and, particularly, with the EVES-based systems, this paper provides personal impressions on what is and what is not working with regards to the adoption and application of formal methods. As both the community’s understanding of technology transfer issues and formal methods technology improve, one i...
متن کاملذخیره در منابع من
با ذخیره ی این منبع در منابع من، دسترسی به آن را برای استفاده های بعدی آسان تر کنید
عنوان ژورنال:
دوره شماره
صفحات -
تاریخ انتشار 1991