I understand the point you're making, but I think you're painting with an overly broad brush.That may well be true, and I can certainly accept that. Although it has been bugging for some time, this is the first time I've put brush to paper, so to speak, on this subject so some refinement is assuredly needed. And speaking of refinement ...
We used to have something called 'stepwise refinement' in structured programming. The only difference I see now is a change of focus on where stepwise refinement enters the picture (right at the beginning of the design phase), and the fact it now applies to both design and implementation in an interactive feedback loop. It is still much more like our traditional notion of stepwise refinement than evolution, in both a descriptive and a processual sense, and I think we'd be better served recognizing that fact.
In reply to Re: Re: Re: Re: (OT) Evolutionary Design??
by Anonymous Monk
in thread (OT) Evolutionary Design??
by Anonymous Monk
| For: | Use: | ||
| & | & | ||
| < | < | ||
| > | > | ||
| [ | [ | ||
| ] | ] |