main

main@lists.alug.org.uk

10372 discussions

Re: [Alug] ALUG Librarian stuff
by MJ Ray 11 Jun '01

11 Jun '01

David Freeman <david_freeman(a)rocketmail.com> writes: > Exactly. The english language is a self referential incomplete system ( > i.e. recuresion to recursion) and by using a meta language - UML - we > can desribe things without the self referentailism. ...but instead UML is defined in English which is a self-referential... you get the idea ;-) > I think you mean spiral [...] Instead of what? "Waterfall" rings a bell from my Systems Engineering course many years ago. -- MJR

3 2

Re: [Alug] ANNOUNCE: ALUG 2001.4 (End Of The Academic Year!)
by MJ Ray 11 Jun '01

11 Jun '01

"Mark Wilkinson" <mark(a)wilkinson.uk.com> writes: > I hate to be the one to say this but I think it's worth pointing out that > 17th June is Father's day and some of us may have other commitments that > day, especially those travelling a long distance. Oh well, where were you 10 days ago? Bit late to change now, unless there's an overwhelming outcry. I'll hold the announcement back until tomorrow just in case. -- MJR

2 1

Re: [Alug] ALUG Librarian stuff
by MJ Ray 10 Jun '01

10 Jun '01

David Freeman <david_freeman(a)rocketmail.com> writes: > > Anyway, imperative-OO still has "do this, do that" at its core... > Not if used properly. its more on event x do y etc... Still, imperative. [...] > True. I wasn't there so can't comment much. but how was the program > spec defined? I'm not too clear on that (I was just trying to assess technical skills), but copiously specified by recognised experts from partner institutions. ;-) > prototypes? you design it in pseudo code, Yippee, non-testable code! > this then becomes your comments as you write code round them. All > languages(well most) have the same basic principles of sequence > selection and interation. Read Code Complete by Steve Mcconnell. Is it a book, article, kiwi fruit, sth else? You're describing imperative programming again, but that's irrelevant here. -- MJR

1 0

Assumptions and Paradoxes Re: ALUG Librarian stuff
by MJ Ray 10 Jun '01

10 Jun '01

David Freeman <david_freeman(a)rocketmail.com> writes: > > Have to pretty much try this. Having some sort of deposits may be a > > good move, but who holds them? > In a per-to-peer system? good question, in a centralised system? the > librarian. So who is the librarian with lots of space and time for travelling? No-one, I suspect. [assumptions] > So basically you are using one incomplete system for prove another > incomplete system? An assumption is object with no evidence of fact > backing it up which is used to help prove one system. And as such they > are the mother of all f*** ups. No, assumptions are essential to any logic system. You may not like them because they can't be proved, but you can't do anything without them. Did you know that the commonly-taught version of mathematical set theory has assumptions which lead to logical inconsistencies? A good example is Russell's paradox, the set of all sets which do not contain themselves. There was a long effort early last century to define a set theory which was free of inconsistencies. My memory is not perfect, but I don't think that it succeeded. Therefore, I propose that any system will have flaws arising from its assumptions. The best we can hope for is minor flaws, but by making the assumptions relevant, we can get something which serves us well. -- MJR

2 1

Re: [Alug] ALUG Librarian stuff, part 2
by MJ Ray 10 Jun '01

10 Jun '01

<skirmish type="horseback" carrying="scythe"> David Freeman <david_freeman(a)rocketmail.com> writes: > Why not use a sensible system? Why not write the front end in Java and > use the JDBC? <slay with="scythe" reason="playing devil's advocate">David Freeman</slay> <fx type="blood-curdling scream" /> </skirmish> Oh, and now find the system which is running the library in Java with JDBC... > Also don't forget the need to stocktake and do a check on integrity. > Stocktake can be done on the fly, ie when an item goes through the > hands of a trusted party - the item can be "audited". Another table > becons. I imagine the integrity check to er um prove transactions > are ordered OK vs datestamp sequence, If you accept items which have moved successfully recently, you only have to get the original issue codes from the holders of the other books to make sure they still have it and accept responsibility for it. Flag anything that hasn't moved for ages or has moved unsuccessfully for investigation by the admin. -- MJR

2 1

Re: [Alug] ALUG Librarian stuff
by MJ Ray 10 Jun '01

10 Jun '01

David Freeman <david_freeman(a)rocketmail.com> writes: > we think > a has the facilities to do x y and y > b inherites the functionaility from a and adds p q r and s > OO is better for modern software. Some people may, but I see a process as a composition of processes carried out by actors. Imperative-OO is just so much overhead to this viewpoint. Anyway, imperative-OO still has "do this, do that" at its core... > Read UML in a nutshell and get back to me, and also phone the poor sod > and give him the Job, he sounds like he may know what he's talking > about. Formally proving programs, nice :o) Sure, he'd be good for a job, but not a job where we needed someone to design applications to an already-defined specification and deal with a large backlog of data to be processed. Horse for courses ;-) At the very least, he was off-beam with his pitch. > > > > > Good code is code which meets the needs of the application and > > > > > doesn't crash. [...] > > > > Being written is a prerequisite for these. > > > No its not, being written well is the prerequisite. > > How is being written not a prereq for being written well? ;-) > You obviously aren't in the camp of designing bugs out of programs. Yes, but how can you design without prototypes? Show me someone who can make things without ever experimenting and I'll show you some angels on the head of a pin... > I'm no expert in this sort fo stuff, but I do know that the whole > relational Paradigm and the OO paradigm are very closely tide in, ARF! -- MJR

2 1

Re: [Alug] ALUG Librarian stuff
by MJ Ray 10 Jun '01

10 Jun '01

David Freeman <david_freeman(a)rocketmail.com> writes: David, trim your quotes, please. ;-) > Centralisation. As much as I like the idea of the Peer-to-peer > networking technique it, like most ideas, is only applicable to certain > tasks, and I believe this isn't one of those. I think a hybrid of > peer-to-peer and centrailised systems much like napster would be a good > solutions. Well, this has been covered in the earlier messages, but unless we have this p2p scheme, then either books will have to only change hands at our irregularly-spaced meetings when the borrowers are both present or whoever is the librarian will have to travel a lot. > I may also model the relational scheme or I may do it as objects to be > written in java. Oi! Implementation issues! Make your mind up! ;^) [...] > "yes, Joh do you have the book I gave you at the last meet?" > "No I wasn't at the last meet" > "So who got that book then?" This is why the ticket-code system was being mooted. As I understand it, it could work like this: the prospective borrower gets a release code on their request which is also sent to the current borrower. The current borrower checks that the person asking for the book has this release code when handing the book over, then confirms the handover to the library system, once again with the code. > I will have to confiscate your fine adjustment tool at the next meet. > Every engineer knows that a large ajustable spanner works better, after > all it has more uses than just bugdening something :o) Adjustable spanners are crap. They break when you bludgeon things with them. > oh goody an interative development process. Is this sarcasm or not? :-S -- MJR

2 1

ANNOUNCE: ALUG 2001.4 (End Of The Academic Year!)
by MJ Ray 10 Jun '01

10 Jun '01

Announce: ALUG 2001.4 (End Of The Academic Year!) The next ALUG meeting will be at our UEA Norwich venue as a guest of tsw.org.uk (the student web) on Sunday 17th June 2001 2:00pm - 6:00pm. We hope to hold a demonstration of some security attacks (very likely), a discussion of security measures (almost certain) and a practical exercise on configuring printers (quite likely). Venue details at http://www.anglian.lug.org.uk/venues/uea.html. If you are coming please email me on (alug at towers.org.uk) with details of any kit you are bringing so we can update the web site. Please mail the list if you have any requests for help or would like a demonstration of anything specific and we will try to accommodate if at all possible. tsw will provide tables, chairs and some networking, while drinks and food vending machines are available. There is no entrance charge to this venue, but refreshment facilities other than the above may be limited. It is anticipated that we will move to a pub after the meeting. I'll post this to relevant Usenet groups later today if no-one has upgrades? (And of course "waaaaaaaaaaaah the web site is out of control" again.) -- MJR

4 4

Re: [Alug] ALUG Librarian stuff
by MJ Ray 10 Jun '01

10 Jun '01

David Freeman <david_freeman(a)rocketmail.com> writes: > This is cos you probalby have no formal training in systems analysis. > once you try and use them they will become second nature, have a look > at the book "UML in a nutshell" it explains it all, I was like you I > ignored it all untill I understood how it would all work, I now will > try and use UML for my software to improve it. Well, I'll take a look, but the majority of systems analysis methods appeared to be focused on the object-orientated imperative paradigm, which isn't where I usually (want to) live. Am I wrong on this? Would I be able to use UML in my work? I know that I've been on panels rejecting a candidate who started spouting about using UML. (OK, they were also talking about Z, formally proving programs and other things we didn't want for a "data juggler" who had to start with a backlog of data which had already had its format designed by experts elsewhere ;-) ) > > http://rabbit.stu.uea.ac.uk/pipermail/alug/2001-May/001083.html > > Only Brett seemed to criticise it... > Critisie my scheme or my methods? Scheme afaict. > > > Good code is code which meets the needs of the application and > > > doesn't crash. [...] > > Being written is a prerequisite for these. > No its not, being written well is the prerequisite. How is being written not a prereq for being written well? ;-) > > Is an RDBMS appropriate, or should we just assume an OO backing > > store? > true, but the principles are the same, they all boil down to designing > a relationa scheme which then needs to be normalised, and as relational > theory is based on set theory as is OO theory the design is applicable > to both, hence my keeping animplementation independent view of things. The realities of modern RDBMSs with all the triggers and code inside the database seems to be quite far from pure set theory to me. There's quite a nice piece about it in the most recent VSJ, I think. -- MJR

3 3

Re: [Alug] ALUG Librarian stuff
by MJ Ray 10 Jun '01

10 Jun '01

David Freeman <david_freeman(a)rocketmail.com> writes: > I never got around to ripping it a part. The problems are > 1) Based on assumptions > a) People are honest Have to pretty much try this. Having some sort of deposits may be a good move, but who holds them? > b) People will notice books have gone astray Send out "please confirm your borrowing" emails and email the maintainers or this list if people don't answer? > c) People will return books Same as a, surely? > In that case you haven't modelled the system properly. You can't start > programming till you have a decent enough idea of how it will work. > incedentally I will have a modell created by mondays IRC. It seems this model is slipping further and further back... > There needs to be a dead line for collection and for loans, but you > would have modelled this in the functional requirements. Unless we discuss this thing, how do we find these things out? I don't believe any initial model will get all of these things right first time. > And what are assumptions? Assumptions are beliefs which you accept as truths in order to build a logical system. They cannot be proved, but they are used to prove other results. I would have thought you'd know that, having used the word so freely... -- MJR

2 1

Jump to page:

2025

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

2005

2004

2003

2002

2001

2000

1999

1998

1997

main