Re: What does this NULL mean?

From: dawn <dawnwolthuis_at_gmail.com>
Date: 21 Dec 2005 10:21:52 -0800
Message-ID: <1135189312.420769.237270_at_f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com>


mAsterdam wrote:
> dawn wrote:
> > mountain man wrote:
> >
> >>David Cressey wrote:
> > <snip>
> >
> >>The time will eventually arrive when
> >>the model of the code and the model of the data will be taken
> >>under one theoretical umbrella.
> >
> > Some strands within the s/w development profession have addressed this
> > better than others over the years.
> >
> > I'm also in the process-&-data-are-two-sides-of-the-same-coin camp. If
> > you zoom out, you see that we are working with input, processing,
> > storage, and output. Data models are obviously required for each of
> > these areas and processing is the big picture. You can see the
> > processing clearly with input, processing, and output, but it is also
> > implied with storage -- it is intended for use so there is an
> > interface for input so there can be processing and output. Decisions
> > related to data affect process and vice versa -- they are necessarily
> > interwoven into a whole.
>
> (OT, considering the eternal NULL in the subject line-)
>
> Yet this is just one of two big picture views of that whole.
> The other one is capture - data - presentation.
>
> What you (we) put in the middle depends on your concern: are
> you managing process or data?

Surely both. The data in the middle of your list includes code or at least the declarations for the moving parts (e.g. constraints). The processes of capturing and presenting include data and data models. You may put data in the center, if you like, recognizing these are all components of software applications/solutions. The umbrella over your list is something like Information Processing while for mine is Computer Software.

> IMO both views are necessary.
> Overemphasizing one of them all the time makes one have to limp
> all the time.

Agreed. I'm a "data person" (although not on that end of the spectrum in a crowd like this one, I would guess), but I don't view data in isolation. What would be the point of that?

> Not practical, and leading to unbalanced theories.

Agreed. Cheers! --dawn Received on Wed Dec 21 2005 - 19:21:52 CET

Original text of this message