Re: Process Model

From: Bob Badour <bbadour_at_pei.sympatico.ca>
Date: Sun, 21 May 2006 22:17:40 GMT
Message-ID: <8G5cg.10841$A26.266491@ursa-nb00s0.nbnet.nb.ca>

David Cressey wrote:

> "Bob Badour" <bbadour_at_pei.sympatico.ca> wrote in message
> news:V8Gbg.10236$A26.252515_at_ursa-nb00s0.nbnet.nb.ca...
>

>>>>I will assume Coad and Yourdon used 'functional decomposition' in its
>>>>engineering sense and not in the computing sense for dividing tasks for
>>>>parallel execution.
>>>
>>>Coad and Yourden were discussing analysis,  and mentioned functional
>>>decomposition as a way of analyzing the problem domain.  They were

>
> building
>

>>>towards a motivation for object oriented analysis, the subject of the

>
> book.
>

>>I am familiar with the book. I read it years ago, and I stand by all of
>>my earlier statements.

>
> Your understanding of what you read is different from mine.

That's the inevitable outcome when dealing with nebulous imprecision. It hardly merits saying.

>>You posited some 'thing' unique to object orientation from which others
>>could learn or which one could apply to other fields, and you gave it a
>>name: 'process model'.

>
> When did I do that?

Oh, puhlease... you know damned well when you did: http://groups.google.com/group/comp.databases.theory/msg/58806cd6c7405bb0 Received on Sun May 21 2006 - 17:17:40 CDT