On 20/08/2011 01:31 AM, Darren New wrote:
> On 8/19/2011 15:05, clipka wrote:
>> Well, not precisely - you still have to translate the design of what you
>> want to build into a computer-palatable language. And it so happens that
>> often you find out during this phase that you weren't clear about what
>> *exactly* you wanted to build.
>
> That's part of being sufficiently exact. If you're sufficiently exact,
> the translation step can be automated. (For example, we call that "a
> compiler". ;-)

Lest anyone doubt this, at uni we learned about something called 
Computer Aided Software Engineering ("CASE"). We used a tool called 
Rational Rose. You draw various class diagrams, flowcharts, etc., and 
then press a button, and it spits out C++ source code. If your diagrams 
are detailed enough, the generated code actually compiles and runs, and 
*is* "the finished system".

All without you ever writing a single line of code yourself. Or even 
knowing *how* to program C++.

So yes, if your design is detailed enough, the translation is (or can be 
made) automatic.

-- 
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*

Post a reply to this message