Abstract
Jim Tomayko’s paper contains much of interest to me, and I think to others, too. It certainly provokes comments from an engineer who has made a livelihood of developing software products. The same questions have been posed to me again and again as the software man in an environment dominated by hardware people. I shall address only the three main themes of Jim’s paper: the art of software engineering, its scientific basis and the role of failure.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Terri Maginnis, “Engineers Don’t Build,” IEEE Software 17/1 (2000): 34–9.
Elaine S. Hochman, Bauhaus: Crucible of Modernism (New York, 1997).
Karl R. Popper, Conjectures and Refutations: The Growth of Scientific Knowledge (London, 1963).
Michael R. Lyu, Handbook of Software Reliability Engineering (New York, 1996).
Robert L. Glass, Software Runaways (Englewood Cliffs, N.J., 1997).
John D. Musa et al., “The Operational Profile,” in Handbook of Software Reliability Engineering, ed. Michael R. Lyu (New York, 1996).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2002 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg
About this paper
Cite this paper
Endres, A. (2002). Commentary on James E. Tomayko, “Software as Engineering”. In: Hashagen, U., Keil-Slawik, R., Norberg, A.L. (eds) History of Computing: Software Issues. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-04954-9_7
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-04954-9_7
Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Print ISBN: 978-3-642-07653-4
Online ISBN: 978-3-662-04954-9
eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive