tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7377057412446264720.post6402057641648280244..comments2023-07-10T00:13:42.099-04:00Comments on <a href="http://antipastohw.blogspot.com/">Antipasto Hardware Blog</a>: The emergence of "instant prototyping" vs. "rapid prototyping"Unknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7377057412446264720.post-88318188753576952672010-09-06T11:27:35.822-04:002010-09-06T11:27:35.822-04:00@Jim - will do, i'll check it out... cheers!@Jim - will do, i'll check it out... cheers!Matthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17939917648960591808noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7377057412446264720.post-75930749193774757702010-09-02T14:50:24.527-04:002010-09-02T14:50:24.527-04:00Sorry Matt. I guess I just misinterpreted your pos...Sorry Matt. I guess I just misinterpreted your post because of the phrase "pie-in-the-sky" and your reference to the age of the author.<br /><br />Some people (including experienced programmers) just don't understand the true value of abstraction. If it wasn't for the abstractionists (such as Brooks), we'd still be knapping flints and prodding animals with pointy sticks!<br /><br />In my view, the future of hardware (and software) development is the move to higher and higher levels of abstraction. This empowers hardware hackers (if that's the right term) such as you and to a lesser extent me, by hiding complexity and allowing us to achieve much with relatively little input.<br /><br />I've personally been involved with Model Driven Architecture in which you generate code directly from quite abstract UML models. Think "compiled language", where UML is the "language", the "compiler" is the code generator, and the machien code is Java, Python, C++ etc. <br /><br />Several of my clients generate 100% of their code from UML models. And this isn't code you could easily write manually - it is instrumented, documented and comes complete with test and deployment suites.<br /><br />If you are interested, you might like to check out my book "Enterprise Patterns and MDA" for some ideas about abstraction, code generation, components (patterns) etc. Although it's not stated explicitly anywhere in the book, some of the ideas are inspired by a consideration of hardware. Here's a link:<br /><br />http://www.amazon.com/Enterprise-Patterns-MDA-Building-Archetype/dp/032111230X/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1283453011&sr=8-1<br /><br />One of the reasons I follow your blog is that I like your approach to hardware - using big chunks with high levels of abstraction! I think it's the future.Jimhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16451364608749003784noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7377057412446264720.post-16749996009495405472010-09-02T05:57:16.052-04:002010-09-02T05:57:16.052-04:00and yes, it's very late. that's because i ...and yes, it's very late. that's because i went back and am now rereading (skimming) the first book to see all the parts i might have missed when i read it the first time.Matthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17939917648960591808noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7377057412446264720.post-59930808573647174132010-09-02T05:55:24.841-04:002010-09-02T05:55:24.841-04:00@Jim - no no! my main point is precisely this: thi...@Jim - no no! my main point is precisely this: this is an *excellent* book. It served the goal of making me realize the science *behind* design, as opposed to simply blindly following a process I didn't even know I was following.<br /><br />Experience is valuable, and I have a great respect for Brooks and his writing style (it is a compliment that he can write succinctly about such high-level concepts!). His first book really changed the way I coded. This book changed the way I *think* about circuit and PCB design, which is closer to what I enjoy, designing and hacking hardware...<br /><br />I actually think Brook's age has a lot to do with it - in a good way. The world has changed dramatically in the time since he started managing design, and in the opening chapters he specifically points out how technology was *supposed* to change the way problems were solved and design was made. This type of perspective is impossible to get unless you truly have a multi-decade view.<br /><br />Take for instance video-conferencing ("Telecollaboration" as Brooks calls it, I loved the picture on page 88). 5 years ago, it was going to change the way meetings happened. Conference rooms all over the world installed it. And yet today, many people I've talked to regard it as a pain. It takes longer to set up than is really useful. I think we need more of this forward-looking meta-perspective about technologies we create. Where are they going? What are they really good for? Do they solve a collaboration problem they were intended to address?<br /><br />I wonder: is twitter going to help teams of hackers and engineers build better systems? Probably not. Because, according to Brooks, it's in some ways extremely disruptive to a cognitive design trajectory. It's a decent navigation tool, it can add some random input, but it remains to be seen whether broadcast communications can really solve engineering problems.<br /><br />I truly enjoyed this book, I highly recommend it.Matthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17939917648960591808noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7377057412446264720.post-122817764788037172010-09-02T04:49:15.789-04:002010-09-02T04:49:15.789-04:00What you are really talking about here is raising ...What you are really talking about here is raising the level of abstraction. That's precisely what books such as, "The Design of Design" aim to do. Perhaps you should actually read it before you form an opinion about it...<br /><br />"whom I've never meant, but from his picture, looks old"<br /><br />Is this ageism? What has the authors age got to do with anything?Jimhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16451364608749003784noreply@blogger.com