扩展摘要:订婚

HOWARD-60 Pub Date : 1900-01-01 DOI:10.29007/8h8t
S. Thompson
{"title":"扩展摘要:订婚","authors":"S. Thompson","doi":"10.29007/8h8t","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"How do we engage with the artefacts that we build as software engineers or computer scientists? Programs are one thing: we can execute them and see how they behave, as well as engaging with them in other ways. Other artefacts – many of which are more abstract and formal – present more of a problem. Mathematicians, who are used to dealing with rigorously presented ideas and proofs, have a social process for dealing with understanding. Arguably, however, they have just the same problem with a more formal presentation: for example, by all accounts Russell and Whitehead’s Principia Mathematica is riddled with mistakes of minor and more major significance. In the computing domain, what sort of questions do we want to ask about an artefact such as a specification or a set of tests?","PeriodicalId":422904,"journal":{"name":"HOWARD-60","volume":"38 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Extended Abstract: Getting Engaged\",\"authors\":\"S. Thompson\",\"doi\":\"10.29007/8h8t\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"How do we engage with the artefacts that we build as software engineers or computer scientists? Programs are one thing: we can execute them and see how they behave, as well as engaging with them in other ways. Other artefacts – many of which are more abstract and formal – present more of a problem. Mathematicians, who are used to dealing with rigorously presented ideas and proofs, have a social process for dealing with understanding. Arguably, however, they have just the same problem with a more formal presentation: for example, by all accounts Russell and Whitehead’s Principia Mathematica is riddled with mistakes of minor and more major significance. In the computing domain, what sort of questions do we want to ask about an artefact such as a specification or a set of tests?\",\"PeriodicalId\":422904,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"HOWARD-60\",\"volume\":\"38 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"1900-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"HOWARD-60\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.29007/8h8t\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"HOWARD-60","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.29007/8h8t","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

作为软件工程师或计算机科学家,我们如何与我们所构建的工件互动?程序是一回事:我们可以执行它们,观察它们的行为,以及以其他方式与它们互动。其他人工制品——其中许多更加抽象和正式——带来了更多的问题。数学家习惯于处理严谨的观点和证明,他们有一个处理理解的社会过程。然而,有争议的是,他们在更正式的表述中也有同样的问题:例如,据所有人说,罗素和怀特海的《数学原理》充满了小错误和更重要的错误。在计算领域中,我们想要问关于工件(如规范或一组测试)的什么类型的问题?
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Extended Abstract: Getting Engaged
How do we engage with the artefacts that we build as software engineers or computer scientists? Programs are one thing: we can execute them and see how they behave, as well as engaging with them in other ways. Other artefacts – many of which are more abstract and formal – present more of a problem. Mathematicians, who are used to dealing with rigorously presented ideas and proofs, have a social process for dealing with understanding. Arguably, however, they have just the same problem with a more formal presentation: for example, by all accounts Russell and Whitehead’s Principia Mathematica is riddled with mistakes of minor and more major significance. In the computing domain, what sort of questions do we want to ask about an artefact such as a specification or a set of tests?
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Pandora's Box Can a system learn from interactive proofs? Stone duality for first-order logic: a nominal approach to logic and topology Model checking Timed CSP On the Expressiveness of some Runtime Validation Techniques
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1