Re: TDD: Test-Driven Design or Test-Driven Development?
From: Paul Campbell (p.au.l.ca.mp.b.ell_at_ob.jectvi.sion.c.o.u.k)
Date: 02/10/04
- Next message: Phlip: "Re: TDD: Test-Driven Design or Test-Driven Development?"
- Previous message: H. S. Lahman: "Re: Iterators redux"
- In reply to: Leif Roar Moldskred: "Re: TDD: Test-Driven Design or Test-Driven Development?"
- Next in thread: Robert C. Martin: "Re: TDD: Test-Driven Design or Test-Driven Development?"
- Reply: Robert C. Martin: "Re: TDD: Test-Driven Design or Test-Driven Development?"
- Reply: Universe: "Re: TDD: Test-Driven Design or Test-Driven Development?"
- Reply: Universe: "Re: TDD: Test-Driven Design or Test-Driven Development?"
- Reply: Universe: "Re: TDD: Test-Driven Design or Test-Driven Development?"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Date: Tue, 10 Feb 2004 18:48:22 -0000
"Leif Roar Moldskred" <rmoldskr+usenet@online.no> wrote in message news:86isifj9t9.fsf@huldreheim.huldreskog.no...
> "Paul Campbell" <p.au.l.ca.mp.b.ell@ob.jectvi.sion.c.o.u.k> writes:
>
> > If the drafting of those documents requires novel human input (i.e. cannot
> > be theoretically automated) then IMO is *is* a design activity. If it doesnt
> > then they arnt. If somone has a more succint universal definition of "design"
> > than mine Id like to hear it.
>
> I find that a particularly useless definition of design, and it
> doesn't correspond to any usage of the word that I'm familiar
> with.
> First of all, a (theoretical) mechanical brain would suffice to
> automate any human activity - which by your definition means that
> _nothing_ is a design activity.
OK ill refine my definition of "theoretically possible to automate": that which
could be automated with our current knowledge of AI and the application of
infinite (within reason) human brain power and material resources. Under this
criteria the creation of an automaton to solve arbitrary problems is not possible
(at least according to the current state of AI as I understand it) , wheres
automating the welding together of the parts of a ship is (it would just take a
sod of a long time).
> Furthermore, not all creative activities are designing.
>Writing a novel is never referred to as
> "designing a novel", nor does anyone talk about "designing a
> symphony."
OK we dont actually use the word "design" for these activites but IMO in
essence they are the same as what we do to create an engineering artifact.
>
> Anyway, in this discussion we've been discussing design in engineering
> terms which is even narrower than the common usage of the word. To
> quote Webster's, the three sub-definitions that are most relevant for
> this thread is (for the noun):
>
> "4 : a preliminary sketch or outline showing the main features of
> something to be executed : DELINEATION
>
> 5 a : an underlying scheme that governs functioning, developing, or
> unfolding : PATTERN, MOTIF <the general design of the epic> b : a plan
> or protocol for carrying out or accomplishing something (as a
> scientific experiment); also : the process of preparing this
>
> 6 : the arrangement of elements or details in a product or work of
> art"
Well what are books and symphonies if not works of art.
Paul C.
- Next message: Phlip: "Re: TDD: Test-Driven Design or Test-Driven Development?"
- Previous message: H. S. Lahman: "Re: Iterators redux"
- In reply to: Leif Roar Moldskred: "Re: TDD: Test-Driven Design or Test-Driven Development?"
- Next in thread: Robert C. Martin: "Re: TDD: Test-Driven Design or Test-Driven Development?"
- Reply: Robert C. Martin: "Re: TDD: Test-Driven Design or Test-Driven Development?"
- Reply: Universe: "Re: TDD: Test-Driven Design or Test-Driven Development?"
- Reply: Universe: "Re: TDD: Test-Driven Design or Test-Driven Development?"
- Reply: Universe: "Re: TDD: Test-Driven Design or Test-Driven Development?"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Relevant Pages
|