Intuitive Bug-less Software? 558
Starlover writes "In the latest java.sun.com feature at Sun's Java site, Victoria Livschitz takes on some ideas of Jaron Lanier on how to make software less buggy. She makes a couple of interesting points. First, making software more 'intuitive' for developers will reduce bugs. Second, software should more closely simulate the real world, so we should be expanding the pure object-oriented paradigm to allow for a richer set of basic abstractions -- like processes and conditions. The simple division of structures into hierarchies and collections in software too simple for our needs according to Livschitz. She offers a set of ideas explaining how to get 'there' from here. Comments?"
What you need for bugless code (Score:2, Funny)
Well... (Score:5, Funny)
Feels right.
Not a good idea... (Score:3, Funny)
Writing bugless code would throw the universe upside down and could possibly mean the end of the world!
Moderation Guideline: +3 Funny.
Comments? (Score:5, Funny)
Not my problem anymore. (Score:5, Funny)
The real world is intuitive? (Score:5, Funny)
Perhaps she should make up her mind.
Re:Three-choice system of logic (Score:5, Funny)
Re:I'm sure... (Score:5, Funny)
You been experiencing a few too many glitches in the Matrix lately, or something?
Speaking of mistakes... (Score:5, Funny)
Orthogonal... (Score:3, Funny)
"....especially because I've always thought that the principles of fuzzy logic should be exploited far more widely in software engineering. Still, my quest for the answer to Jaron's question seems to yield ideas orthogonal to his own. "
I fear people that talk like this. It makes me wonder if they go home at night and plug themselves into something.....
Being sandbagged by java? (Score:4, Funny)
I think she means sandbox architecture [javaworld.com]
...and the wheel turns (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Test? (Score:2, Funny)
Re:I'd rather have... (Score:5, Funny)
Right now I am in a Computer Science program. I have had the pleasure to see:
I don't think the whole proper education thing is going to happen any time soon.
Re:I found it to be interesting (Score:5, Funny)
* More intuitive
* More inclusive
* Pattern recognition vs. "yes/no" type logic
Ah... ok, let's turn those 90 degrees:
* More context-aware
* There's more than one way to do it
* Logic using higher order comparison such as regular expressions and grammars
Hmmm... Perl anyone?
Perl is universally panned by people who don't use it for being "opaque", and yet that opacity is the result of all three of the above, and CPAN is a monumental testiment to the value of those features in terms of large-scale software engineering.
If your opinion of dollar-signs is so valuable to you that you can't see the value in 4GB of source code sitting at your fingertips, then I direct you to the nearest Java tutorial....
Re:Jaron Who? (Score:2, Funny)
Re:I'd rather have... (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Well... (Score:5, Funny)
I never did get around to asking him how he knew that, or if it was kind of a gut feeling he had.
Agreed, but for this reason... (Score:3, Funny)
Let's not Ignore the Livschitz. (Score:4, Funny)
She's the real story here. I think I'm in love.
Re:Well... (Score:5, Funny)
Star Trek (Score:2, Funny)
Even the tech gurus on Star Trek can reprogram most computer problems in minutes, or at the outside, in a day or two. This would appear to be functional programming, as mentioned earlier in the article. I've never heard Jordi complain about referencing a null pointer anywhere.
In short, the answer is Star Trek. Sun, Microsoft, IBM, and the rest just needs to get off their asses and deliver whatever programming language was used on the Enterprise! Damn the bureaucrats, damn them all!
Re:The secret to bug free code... (Score:2, Funny)
True. It's always going to be some sort of combination of 'need it yesterday', 'soon', 'works pretty good', or 'handles fatal exceptions exceptionally well'.
Re:Sorry, but I hate Perl (Score:2, Funny)
I tried to use Python, but perl complained:
Can't locate Python.pm in @INC (@INC contains: