Re: Functional Programming in the Larger or Functional Oriented Software Engineering

On Thursday 15 March 2007 14:09, James McCartney wrote:
> On 3/15/07, Tommy M. McGuire <[email protected]> wrote:
> > Indeed, yes.  In fact, the greatest advantage of UML is that it is
> > *internationally* *standardized* napkin drawings.  :-)
> 
> quotable

Although no match for the Wildean brevity of McGuire, Bertrand Meyer's
prose more than makes up in vehemence for what it lacks in literary
grace:

  http://archive.eiffel.com/doc/manuals/technology/bmarticles/uml/page.html

  | UML: The Positive Spin
  | by Bertrand Meyer
  | 
  | Quote #1:
  | 
  |     If UML addressed implementation it would have to address
  |     software issues; the good thing about bubbles and arrows, as
  |     opposed to programs, is that they never crash.
  | 
  | Quote #2:
  | 
  |     UML, as I said already, serves no software-related purpose
  |     whatsoever, and that's fine with me -- some people have better
  |     things to do with their lives than trying to improve software
  |     technology
  | 
  | Quote #3:
  | 
  |     My long search had not been in vain. It had led me to a full
  |     appreciation of the UML, this admirable self-feeding machine,
  |     devoted from A to Z to the creation of a new market, free of
  |     any of the difficulties associated with the unpleasant
  |     business of software development: UML books! UML courses!
  |     Courses on the books! Books on the courses! Books on the
  |     books! Introductory courses to prepare for the advanced
  |     courses! Courses for those who teach the courses! Revisions!
  |     UML journals! Conferences!  Workshops! Tutorials! Standards!
  |     Committees! T-shirts!


Now *that* is what I call quotable.