[SystemSafety] Logic

[John Knight]

Peter,

> obviously I agree with much of what you say. But I am discussing with people who believe that we
> constitute an exception to much of it.

I think we are talking about different things.  Research projects need 
software rapid prototypes to support investigation in areas such as AI 
and robotics.   These are "throw-away" prototypes that should never make 
it into production and usually don't.

I am talking about software products that are part of engineered 
computer systems which will subject others (possibly the general public) 
to risk.  Higher education has a responsibility to prepare professional 
engineers to perform that engineering.  That education needs to make it 
clear that:

  * Engineers are responsible for what they do.
  * Engineering is a profession not some amateur activity.
  * Mathematics is an essential component of professional computer
    engineering.

In response to the comment from Les Chambers:

"We must find a way to bring formal methods out of the lab and into 
general use."

I generally agree.  But I note that we have industrial strength systems 
such as SPARK Ada, industrial scope use of such systems such as the NATS 
iFACTS system, and substantial evidence from Peter Amey and his 
colleagues that applying such technology is cheaper and better than the 
informal alternatives.

-- John

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.techfak.uni-bielefeld.de/mailman/private/systemsafety/attachments/20140216/f7138735/attachment.html>