HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: cga66@cbnewse.cb.att.com (patrick.v.kauffold)
Subject: Cscope
Organization: AT&T
Date: Mon, 28 Dec 1992 17:59:08 GMT
Keywords: cscope CASE tool

scope availability:

The oldest version (5) described in

Steffen, Joseph L., "Interactive Examination of a C Program with Cscope,",
 USENIX Association Winter Conference Proceedings, pp. 170-5, Dallas,
 January 23-25, 1985.
        
is in the UNIX System V Release 3.2 programmer package.  System V Release 4.0
has version 11.5 with many enhancements, and System V Release 4.1 has
version 12.10 that has an option for much faster searching.

You can buy version 13.3 source with an unrestricted license for $400 from
the AT&T Toolchest by dialing into 1-908-522-6900.  I believe you can see
browse the man pages before buying.

Newsgroups: comp.software-eng
From: claird@NeoSoft.com (Cameron Laird)
Subject: Re: On CM and programmer productivity
Organization: NeoSoft Communications Services -- (713) 684-5900
Date: Thu, 24 Dec 1992 13:33:36 GMT

In article <1992Dec23.201953.2807@netcom.com> mcgregor@netcom.com (Scott Mcgregor) writes:
>I note that in the "When do we inspect" articles that conversation has
>migrated to the issue of CM systems and the overhead they introduce.
			.
			.
>Perhaps this is appropriate in a community that values the internals
>over the external cognitive and organizational psychology factors, and
>which would gladly accept a more limited model  over a better
>commercial alternative because the limited model was free.  I know
"free"--that's a thread that I intended to
spawn a couple of weeks ago, but neglected.
			.
			.
>I'm sorry I can't say a lot more about this, as this is a matter of
>proprietary  advantage to clients, partners and investors.  Perhaps,
>when we have a shrinkwrapped product readers will be able to see if my
>predictions are correct in a set of head to head tests.  But I wanted
>to challenge other people to question the way CM is done today.
>Perhaps once they do so they will contribute to great improvements as well.
I'm always happy to see these issues discussed,
of course.

One of the things I've learned over the last few
years is how important it is for us (us as vendors,
say) to be prepared to meet customers where they
are.  One example, which I've lived over and over
again:  we talk with prospects about leading-edge
analytic reductions, only-just commercial visuali-
zation modes, abstract toolsets, and so on, and
then make a sale because the customer finally be-
lieves that we'll save him at least some small
amount of data-management headache.  The same
companies that talk about AI, OO, NL, ES, ...,
can be wrenchingly behind on implementing automa-
tions that were first begun in the '60s.  I like
Agent models of operation, and your Anticipatory
Agents in particular, but there are a LOT of organ-
izations where periodic backups are still a struggle.
Do you plan to market to them, too--or principally?
The answer isn't obvious to me.
			.
			.
			.
-- 

Cameron Laird
claird@Neosoft.com (claird%Neosoft.com@uunet.uu.net)	+1 713 267 7966
claird@litwin.com (claird%litwin.com@uunet.uu.net)  	+1 713 996 8546
From: nancy@murphy.ICS.UCI.EDU (Nancy Leveson)
Subject: Re: ACM SIGSOFT '93: Foundations of Software Engineering (CFP)
In-reply-to: Your message of Mon, 21 Dec 92 14:26:01 +0000.
             <EMERY.92Dec21092601@dr_no.mitre.org>
Newsgroups: comp.software-eng
Reply-To: nancy@ics.uci.edu
Date: 22 Dec 92 15:29:24 GMT


	 It's interesting noting the professional affiliations of the people
	 organizing this conference:

	 	University:  12
	 	Government: 1
	 	Industrial Research:  2

Exactly what was intended.

	 It bothers me that there are not more people from industry involved
	 with this conference, particularly since the goal is to "help
	 establish software engineering as a viable engineering discipline."
	 After all, practicing software engineers are mostly in industrial
	 settings.

Note the title of the conference:  "Foundations of Software Engineering"
                                    ^^^^^^^^^^^
The reason for starting this conference is to provide a forum for
*researchers* to present and discuss software engineering research results.
ICSE used to provide that forum, but researchers are increasingly unwilling
to submit their papers.  I've been on ICSE program committees where industry
members argued that no paper should be accepted that was not about something
immediately useful and relevant to them, and the papers were rejected.
Researchers are increasingly submitting their papers to conferences and
workshops on specialized topics, which limits the amount of crosstalk
across subfields.

I presented a keynote talk/paper at ICSE in May entitled "High-Pressure
Steam Engines and Computer Software" in which I argued that we need to
establish our scientific foundations, and I was also involved in advocating
the startup of FSE.  To make software engineering into a viable engineering
discipline, we need to build a scientific base and use scientific methods
in our research.  I'm not really sure that this conference will fly since
there are not a lot of people even doing such foundational research -- it
has not been encouraged or such researchers are not willing to say they are
in software engineering anymore.  There is spreading feeling in universities
that software engineering has no hard content, and doctoral students are
being encouraged to work in other areas.   Literally dozens of conferences
exist to provide information for practicing software engineers; let the
researchers have one conference where they do not have to justify the
immediate practicality and applicability of what they are doing.

Nancy Leveson

P.S.  If anyone would like a latex (or dvi) version of my keynote
address, you can get it by anonymous ftp from ics.uci.edu -- it is
in the subdirectory pub/tcas.  The paper has been submitted to CACM
for publication; I would appreciate feedback if you do read it.
From: kuhn@swe.ncsl.nist.gov (Rick Kuhn)
Newsgroups: comp.software-eng
Subject: Re: Putting Engineering into Software Engineering
Date: 24 Dec 92 14:57:13 GMT
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL6]

Jason Baragry (baragry@amdahl1.lat.oz.au) wrote:

..

: 
: 	I think the difference is that in other engineering disciplines these
: modelling / analysis techniques provide a way to analyse the properties of the
: components which constitute the system. In these engineering fields there is
: a high level of reuse and to compare components you need some way of
: representing the properties of these components.

Exactly, that's why reusable software components will require some type of
formal specifications for their properties.  The current approach of
relying on English descriptions of components makes it hard to say how
well a component matches a requirement specification.

: 	Sure, algorithms in SE can be measured by speed but if I am looking
: at which electronic components I would want to reuse to meet my needs I can
: use circuit analysis, frequency & phase analysis, transmission line theory,
: etc to do it. How can I analytically compare to high-level SE components to
: see which one meets my needs the best? (assumming people may one day actually

I've been interested in this problem for some time.  I have a paper in the
Dec. 92 Computer Journal (BCS) that has a start to answering this
question.  It describes a technique for analyzing the effects of changes
in formal specifications, which can also be used to determine which of two
specifications more closely matches a requirement.

: think like this!) I have to rely on written documentation of what the thing
: does and how the thing does it. Perhaps there isn't any way of modelling high
: level SE components. Perhaps the only way to compare SE modules without
: simply relying on documentation (which is very quantifiable) is to animate
: those components and compare their operating performance.
: 
: Jason.
: 
: -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
: Jason Baragry.			|	Amdahl Australian Intelligent 
: Dept Comp. Sci. & Comp. Eng.,	|		Tools Program
: La Trobe University.,		|	baragry@latcs1.lat.oz.au
: Bundoora. 3083.			|	Phone:	+61 3 479 1477
: Australia.			|	Fax:	+61 3 470 4915
: --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

--

Rick Kuhn                                   Telephone: +1 301 975 3337       
Natl Institute of Standards & Technology    Fax:       +1 301 590 0932      
Technology Bldg. B266                       Internet: kuhn@nist.gov
Gaithersburg, Md.  20899  USA                       DRKuhn@dockmaster.ncsc.mil
Xref: sparky comp.software-eng:5177 comp.lang.c:19011
From: hartman@ulogic.UUCP (Richard M. Hartman)
Newsgroups: comp.software-eng,comp.lang.c
Subject: Re: C code Layout
Date: 29 Dec 92 23:16:00 GMT
Followup-To: comp.software-eng
Organization: negligable

In article <HTiBwB5w165w@quest.UUCP> srhqla!quest!kdq writes:
:
:    Yes, and what's worse, (with 4-character tabs) I prefer:
:
:    keyword ( condition )
:       {
:        statement1;
:        statement2;
:        statement3;
:       }
:
:
:    And since my editor (epsilon) handles all the indentation...

Yeah, I used to do that too, but then I grew out of it <g,d,r>

		-Richard Hartman
		hartman@ulogic.COM

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
"186,000 mi/sec.  Not just a good idea, it's the LAW!"
Newsgroups: comp.software-eng
From: bsanden@gmuvax2.gmu.edu (Bo Sanden )
Subject: Re: Best grad schools for Information Systems
Summary: Information Systems and Software Engineering Programmes
	 at George Mason University
Organization: George Mason University, Fairfax, Virginia, USA 
Date: Tue, 29 Dec 1992 19:11:50 GMT

George Mason University, Fairfax, VA (a suburb of Washington,
D.C.) has Master's programmes in Information Systems Engineering
and Software Systems Engineering (among other things). The
software engineering program can often be completed in one year
of full-time study.  Write to Dr. Larry Kerschberg, Chair, 
Dept. ISSE, GMU, Fairfax, VA 22030-4444, USA; Fax (703) 993-1638. 

There is also a Ph.D. program in Information Technology with a
specialization in Software Systems Engineering. Write Dr. James
Palmer, SITE, GMU, Fairfax, VA 22030-4444, USA. Fax (703) 993-1734.
-- 
Bo Sanden                                sanden@wanginst          (CSNET)
Wang Institute of Graduate Studies       decvax!wanginst!sanden   (UUCP)
72 Tyng Road, Tyngsboro, MA 01879-2099   (617) 649-9731
Newsgroups: comp.software-eng
From: shanks@saifr00.cfsat.honeywell.com (Mark Shanks)
Subject: Re: How does TQM set priorities? (was: When do we inspect [long ago])
Keywords: Process
Organization: Honeywell Air Transport Systems Division
Date: Tue, 29 Dec 92 14:47:38 GMT

In article <BzzB0s.MI@NeoSoft.com> claird@NeoSoft.com (Cameron Laird) writes:

>This is one of the foggy areas of Total Quality Management
>and Continuous Process Improvement

AAACCKKKKKK!!!! Those words! Brrrr!!! How about "The Five Keys to
Self-Renewal"? Or "Zero Defects"? (Image here of me brandishing a
cross against the forces of darkness.)

>for me; at what level
>are decisions made?  Maybe "[t]he proper procedure" you
>describe is itself too parochial; maybe there should be an
>organization-wide initiative to address all kinds of lighting
>questions.

Now I seriously hope you are in jest. This is PRECISELY the
cause of paralysis by process. Let's form a committee to study
the problem... Hell, all the guy wants is (the equivalent of)
more light on his work area. Why not "empower" this poor soul
and let him figure out how that should be done. Meanwhile,
everyone else continues working, instead of going to the
newly-formed "Lighting Improvement Committee" meetings. If
this person comes up with an approach that is beneficial to
everyone, give him a bonus and implement it.

>When a Total Quality Manager starts off on Monday morning, and
>finds two initiatives he wants to pursue, on which one does he or
>she start first?

Preferably one that, as the Hippocratic oath advises, "does no harm."
But if you are going to force a "Total Quality" manager on us, that
would be hoping for too much. :-\  

Mark Shanks
shanks@saifr00.cfsat.honeywell.com
From: jaray@loria.fr (Jacques Jaray)
Newsgroups: comp.software-eng
Subject: CASE tool Stp
Keywords: DFD Analysis
Date: 21 Dec 92 16:21:08 GMT
Organization: CRIN (CNRS) Nancy - INRIA Lorraine


Stp forces the analyser to proceed top down does any other tool permits 
a bottom up approach as well?


Jacques.


Newsgroups: comp.software-eng
From: sullivan@cs.washington.edu (Kevin Sullivan)
Subject: Re: Debugging the process
Organization: Computer Science & Engineering, U. of Washington, Seattle
Date: Sat, 2 Jan 93 19:15:24 GMT

In article <1992Dec31.112259.1@bigez> dmmatt@bigez (Mike Mattix) writes:
>
> [stuff deleted]
> 
>The only 
>improvements in accuracy and timeliness of systems in the last 20 years
>can be traced directly back to technological breakthroughs not new 
>project management/software engineering procedures.

I sure wish I could judge whether or not to believe statements like this.

I don't mean to pick on this author particular, but to note that software
engineering debates are unlikely to converge for as long as their quality
remains at the level of such ex cathedra pronouncements.  If studies on a
topic have been done, we should reference them when making assertions like
this one; if not, we should indicate our correspondingly low confidence in
the truth of such claims.




-- 
Kevin Sullivan
Department of Computer Science and Engineering, FR-35
University of Washington
Seattle, WA 98195
From: mframpto@axion.bt.co.uk (Mike Frampton)
Newsgroups: comp.software-eng
Subject: want snippets of design/implementation
Keywords: design code examples
Date: 29 Dec 92 09:14:09 GMT
Reply-To: mframpto@axion.bt.co.uk (Mike Frampton)
Organization: British Telecom Research Labs



hi, can anyone out there help me ... I want to get hold of some examples of design and implementation output. I want to test a set of assessment criteria. The design could be postscript files (diagrams), structured english etc and any form of understandable implementation that relates to it. 

cheers

mjf

standard disclaimer here 
Newsgroups: comp.software-eng
From: pott@ast.saic.com (David L. Pottinger)
Subject: Capers Jones Questionaire
Reply-To: pott@ast.saic.com
Organization: SAIC
Date: Wed, 23 Dec 1992 16:03:46 GMT

Does anyone have information on how I can acquire a copy of the Capers Jones process assessment questionaire? It was referenced in a presentation, but I don't have a copy of the paper.

Any information will be appreciated. E-mail is fine.

Thank you,

Pott

---
David L. Pottinger                             | telephone 619 458-5068
Science Applications International Corporation | fax       619 546-6833
4161 Campus Point Court MS E3                  | e-mail    pott@ast.saic.com
San Diego, CA 92121
From: silva@calypso.cs.wayne.edu (Joao Silva)
Subject: CALL FOR PAPERS
Organization: Wayne State University, Detroit, MI
Date: Thu, 24 Dec 1992 03:17:00 GMT



                         CALL FOR PAPERS

                        2nd  Workshop on

                     PROGRAM COMPREHENSION

                        July 8 - 9, 1993

            Europa Palace Hotel, Capri, Naples, Italy

Most "real life" software engineering deals with existing 
software. Maintenance, reuse, and re-engineering are 
some of the most expensive processes. A significant part of 
their cost is due to software comprehension.
  
This workshop will explore the theoretical, 
methodological, technical, and technological issues of 
program comprehension. It will gather researchers from 
government, academia, and industry.

Papers related, but not limited, to the following topics are 
invited:

- Theories and models for software comprehension
- Experiments related to software comprehension
- Tools facilitating software comprehension
- Reverse engineering to support reuse,  comprehension,            
	    and maintenance
- Innovative technologies for reverse engineering
- Case studies in reverse engineering 
- User interfaces, program visualization and animation.
     
General Co-Chairs:

Bruno Fadini
Project SICP-CNR 
Viale del Policlinico, 137 - 00161 Roma

Vaclav Rajlich
Department of Computer Science
Wayne State University
Detroit, MI 48202
e-mail: rajlich@cs.wayne.edu

Sponsored by:


	The Institute of Electrical and Electronics
	Engineers, Inc.


	IEEE Computer Society

Program Co-Chairs:

Aniello Cimitile
DIS - Dep. of Informatica e Sistemistica
University of Naples
via Claudio 21, 80125 Naples, Italy
(Please use express mail)
Tel. ++39-81-768-3199
Fax ++39-81-768-3186
e-mail: cimitile@inacised.unina.it

Norman Wilde
Department of Computer Science
University of West Florida
Pensacola, FL 32514
Tel. 904-474-2548
Fax 904-474-3023
e-mail: wilde@cs.uwf.edu

Information for authors:

Papers due March 1, 1993
Acceptance notification April 10, 1993
Camera ready copy due May 10, 1993

Submit three (3) copies to the program co-chairs.
Papers should be original work of approximately 
6000 words.  They should not have been previously 
published nor have been submitted to, or be in 
consideration for, any journal, book, or conference. 
Authors are expected to present the accepted paper 
to the workshop.

In Cooperation with:

Project SICP-CNR, Italian National Research 	
Council

ALENIA, Naples

CRIAI - Consorzio Campano per la Ricerca in 	
Informatica ed  Automazione Indistriale

Informatica, Srl., Bari



Newsgroups: comp.software-eng
From: kummer@possum.den.mmc.com (Jim Kummer)
Subject: Re: Concurrent Engineering
Organization: Martin Marietta Astronautics Group, Denver
Date: Tue, 29 Dec 1992 03:51:15 GMT

Prof. Nancy Levenson writes:

> > Concurrent Engineering was a popular idea in the 1950s. 

In the '50s the goal of CE may have been to get a product out the door
as quickly as possible, at the expense of quality and safety.  That is
certainly not true today.  Completion of the first article may actually
take longer with CE than without it, but the goal is that the first
article will require less rework in the production phase due to fewer
problems in quality, machining, packaging, etc.


-- 
 
-- Regards ----- Jim Kummer ----- Martin Marietta Corporation --
----- kummer@pogo.den.mmc.com --- Astronautics Group ----------- 
(standard disclaimer applies) => "I speak for nobody but me"
From: vnoble@dhvx20.csudh.edu
Newsgroups: comp.software-eng
Subject: Software development in Russia?
Date: 23 Dec 92 01:39:58 GMT
Organization: CSU, DOMINGUEZ HILLS


Hi out there in NETland!

I am contemplating investing some money in software development in Russia and
selling it here in US.  It seems to be a good idea since software is a heavily
labor-consuming product with little hardware investment required to start it
out.  As you know, Russia now has a lot of skillful mathematicians, physisists
and programmers who are actively seeking an opportunity to earn any hard
currency.  With exchange rate at rediculously low level and the cost of labor
which is THE cheapest in the world, Russia looks like a heaven for software
development.  Besides, I was born there and lived there until about 5 years
ago, so it is reletively easy for me to establish right contacts.

I would like to solicit your opinion on the following matter.  Short time ago I
encountered an ad of a Russian software company offering different products such
as computer graphics, PC games, learning packages for children with game
elements, and so on.  My question is: Can I try to become a distributor of
their products in US and what kind of agreements are generally required? If I 
had a distribution or licencing agreement with those guys, how would I go
about selling this stuff here? Is there a market for, say, PC games or 
learning packages?  How can I interest big software resellers like CompUSA
or Egghead to carry them? Unfortunately, I do not have any experience in
selling software, so any info on this will be highly appreciated.

You can E-mail me at Vnoble@dhvx20.csudh.edu.

Thank you for taking time to read this.

Vladimir Noble
From: lezz@merlin.dev.cdx.mot.com (Lezz Giles)
Subject: Re: cscope? trus?
Reply-To: lezz@merlin.dev.cdx.mot.com (Lezz Giles)
Organization: Motorola Codex, Canton, MA
Date: Mon, 21 Dec 1992 17:13:39 GMT

In article <1992Dec19.191727.1407@vpnet.chi.il.us>, hb@vpnet.chi.il.us (hank barta) writes:
|>Jerry Heyman (jerry@austin.ibm.com) wrote:
|>
|>: A user has just approached me asking if we have (or can get access to) a
|>: program called cscope.  It is a file browsing tool which will index and load
|>: files from a given directory and index based on the function names, identify
|>: where it is called and give the use the ability to switch immediately into
|>: that particular file/function call.  I don't know if this is PD or a
|>: commercial
|>: product, but if anyone is familiar with this I'd be glad to hear about it.
|>...
|>: ... if
|>: anyone is familiar with this I'd be glad to hear about them.
|>
|>: you can post here, or I would prefer e-mail to: jerry@austin.ibm.com
|>   'cscope' shows up in the man pages of both SCO and ISC development
|>   kits w/out attribution to SCO, Microsoft or LPI, so I believe that
|>   it is probably part of the AT&T development tools. (And for this
|>   reason, may not work with ANSI code.)

We use cscope a lot here - it is an excellent tool for code browsing for
small and large amounts of code (to find 200 occurences of a specific symbol
in approx 1 million lines of code = 5 seconds (DECstation 5000/133)).
It is available from AT&T's toolchest (contact AT&T since I can't remember
the phone number) for a relatively negligable cost.  Cscope doesn't work
perfectly with ANSI-C code - specifically it doesn't understand structures
with fields that are pointers to functions - it gets confused about the
symbols in the parameter list and whether they're global definitions or not.
This is not a major problem, and even with this I'd put cscope up there
with Gimpel's Flexelint as an essential piece of software for software
development in C.

BTW - cscope also understands $VPATH, as used by system V make and gnu make,
which means you can construct a really neat development environment with
sophisticated code-sharing for almost no money.  For more details on this,
simply send your job-offers to me via e-mail...

Lezz "going to the highest bidder" Giles

P.S. If you work for Motorola then you're allowed to use the copy of cscope
that we already have - send me e-mail.

P.P.S. If you work for Motorola then append this to that bit about the
job-offers... ':-)'
Newsgroups: comp.software-eng