www.sixfingeredman.net
..................................................
::. .  .   .     .       .          .

12.10

Quote from comp.lang.lisp, Raffael Cavallaro, Message-ID raffaelcavallaro-35EC05.21271412102003@netnews.comcast.net:

This parallels Paul Graham's critique of the whole idea of program "specifications." To paraphrase Graham,for any non-trivial software, there is no such thing as a specification. For a specification to be precise enough that programmers can convert it directly into code, it must already be a working program! What specifications are in reality is a direction in which programmers must explore, finding in the process what doesn't work and what does, and how, precisely, to implement that.

Once you've realized that there is really no such thing as the waterfall method, it follows inevitably that you'll prefer bottom up program development by exploratory methods. Once you realize that programs are discovered, not constructed from a blueprint, you'll inevitably prefer a language that gives you freedom of movement in all directions, a language that makes it difficult to paint yourself into a corner.