DOCSLIB.ORG

A Discipline of Software Architecture

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
A Discipline of Software Architecture A DISCIPLINE OF SOFTWARE ARCHITECTURE Peter J. Denning* and Pamela A. Dargan** *CS Department, George Mason University, Fairfax, VA 22030 USA, [email protected] **Mitre Corporation, McLean, VA 22102 USA, [email protected] Abstract: Neither software engineering nor software design qualifies as a discipline, but software architecture might. Action-centered design is proposed as the means to build software architecture by joining the two. Key Words: Software engineering, software design, software architecture, action-centered design, ontological mapping, workflow. © 1994, Association for Computing Machinery, Inc. ISSN 1072-5520/94/0100 $3.50 Reprinted with permission from ACM Interactions 1 , 1 (January 1994), 55-65. Permission to make digital or hard copies of part or all of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, to republish, to post on servers, or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permission from <[email protected]>. The software landscape is a mixed field of but never used (Charette 89). Similar problems successes and failures. Most noticeable among persist today (Newport 86). the successes are software packages that turn personal computers into document preparers, Software engineering is characterized as a set of spreadsheets, databases, animators, image formalisms, methods, and practices for displays, drawing tools, financial accountants, producing “reesstmts” -- reliable, economical, tax preparers, legal advisors, encyclopedias, efficient software systems that meet their video games, electronic mailers, network specifications. The persistent inability to achieve browsers, work exchangers, and much more. this goal has led experts to say that software engineering is not a discipline, and that the The failures are disturbing by their number and word “engineering” even conveys the false spectacularity. Peter Neumann has compiled a impression that a discipline exists. The list of the 1500 most disastrous failures of designers of computers recognized early on that software systems since 1972; the list grew by 200 producing “reesstmts” would be a challenge: the cases in 1993 (Neumann 93). Among the most term “software crisis” was already being used in widely known on that list are the aborted NASA the 1960s and inspired the birth of software space mission in 1975 due to a deadlock in the engineering in 1968 (Tichy 92). A long series of distributed control system, the collapse of the innovations including modularity, structured ARPANET in 1980 due to failure of a load programming, chief programmer teams, control algorithm, and the shutdown of a major dataflow diagrams, information hiding, data segment of the AT&T switching network in 1990 abstraction, program verifiers, syntax-directed due to a synchronization bug in the routing editors, programming environments, structured software. A 1979 GAO review of nine software languages, software-parts reusability, visual projects for the Department of Defense showed programming, object-oriented programming that about 2% of the dollars were spent on and design, catalogs of design paradigms, CASE software that was delivered and in use, about a tools, and, most recently, megaprogramming, quarter on software that was never delivered, have produced only modest gains but have not and about half on software that was delivered transformed software engineering into a discipline for producing “reesstmts”. The per- grow into a discipline within a few years and sistence of the software systems crisis over such could resolve the software crisis. a long period leads inescapably to questioning the foundations of software engineering: for the The second claim here is that an ontology of de- field as currently formulated is incapable of sign is needed to bring the two fields together; producing the results it seeks (Andriole 93). neither has such now. (An ontology is a concep- tual framework for interpreting the world in Software design is characterized as a set of prac- terms of actions.) Software engineers see design tices and implementation techniques that allow as a process of gathering requirements into a for- the construction of marketable software systems mal specification and then organizing the soft- that provide form and function satisfying to ware production process, and the software, to users. Software designers tend to think of their meet specifications efficiently and economically. work as a craft best learned through apprentice- Software designers see design as a collection of ship and the design process as a close participa- practices that can only be verbalized as aphor- tion with users. They do not claim to have a isms and rules of thumb; a design is satisfactory discipline. They dispute the claim of software only when a client says it is, an assessment engineers that design is subsumed in software based in part on meeting specifications and in engineering. They say that they do not use soft- part on factors that defy engineering measure- ware engineering methods in their successful ment, such as form, style, esthetics, effective products, that their articles have not been wel- completion of work, freedom from negative come in the software engineering literature, and surprises, anticipation of future cases, and that they have founded such groups as ACM serving organizational and political interests. SIGCHI and the Association for Software Design to pursue investigations of design not fashion- We propose an interpretation of design that is able among software engineers (Kapor 91, Wino- the beginning of an ontology. It is focused on grad 96). the satisfied client and not just the specification- meeting system. It is grounded in a language- Software engineers and software designers share action perspective rather than a systems per- a common interest in developing a discipline spective (Erickson 93). The new interpretation whose practitioners can produce “reesstmts” observes concerns, breakdowns, standard prac- systematically. They disagree on how to accom- tices, institutions, and recurring actions and pro- plish this. Will it require more formalism? More duces means to connect those observations with practice? More emphasis on systems? More software structures. The skill of doing this is emphasis on people? here called action-centered design (Denning and Dargan 96). What is a discipline? To be called a discipline, a field must satisfy three criteria: (a) it has a set of formalisms, methods, models, and processes that Design as Deriving a System are used regularly to produce results, (b) it has a set of standard practices including generally from Specifications accepted community standards for levels of competent performance and criteria for excel- The dictionary lists no less than ten different lence, and (c) its practitioners can reliably fulfill senses of the verb “design”. The primary mean- standard promises to the satisfaction of clients. ing is “to conceive or execute a plan.” Engineers The third criterion is the most important and use the term “design” in a specialized way that least discussed. The question is not whether is consistent with this general definition. formalisms and practices are properly balanced, but what formalisms and practices are necessary Engineers say that design is the dominant para- so that practitioners can keep their promises to digm of engineering. They intend “design” to clients. By these criteria, neither software describe a staged process that begins with a engineering nor software design qualifies as a problem statement, constructs a statement of discipline. requirements and then specifications of a system that solves the problem, builds a prototype Our main claim here is that the missing disci- system, and tests it to demonstrate that it meets pline is neither software engineering nor soft- the specifications within given cost constraints. ware design, but software architecture. It could Like other engineers, software engineers have be constructed by joining software design and used the engineering design process to construct software engineering, following architecture of software systems; in this case they call the pro- buildings as a model. The resulting field would cess the software life cycle model, the most com- mon varieties of which are the waterfall model and the spiral model (Boehm 76, Boehm 87). The We claim that the crisis is more usefully waterfall model was proposed for systems approached as a breakdown of customer satis- whose requirements were fully understood in faction. The standard engineering process offers advance. The spiral model is a more recent little to connect the actions of designers with the extension that accounts for iterations and refine- concerns of customers; the interaction between ments of the system until it converges on one them is limited to the requirements and specifi- acceptable to the customer. Unlike other engi- cations documents (Denning 92a). neers, software engineers cannot claim success for their instance of the engineering design process. They have not developed a systematic method of producing “reesstmts”. Design as Identifying and Taking Many explanations have been proposed to Care of Concerns explain this anomaly. The most
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Chapter 1 Issues—The Software Crisis
    Chapter 1 Issues—The Software Crisis 1. Introduction to Chapter This chapter describes some of the current issues and problems in system development that are caused The term "software crisis" has been used since the by software—software that is late, is over budget, late 1960s to describe those recurring system devel- and/or does not meet the customers' requirements or opment problems in which software development needs. problems cause the entire system to be late, over Software is the set of instructions that govern the budget, not responsive to the user and/or customer actions of a programmable machine. Software includes requirements, and difficult to use, maintain, and application programs, system software, utility soft- enhance. The late Dr. Winston Royce, in his paper ware, and firmware. Software does not include data, Current Problems [1], emphasized this situation when procedures, people, and documentation. In this tuto- he said in 1991: rial, "software" is synonymous with "computer pro- grams." The construction of new software that is both Because software is invisible, it is difficult to be pleasing to the user/buyer and without latent certain of development progress or of product com- errors is an unexpectedly hard problem. It is pleteness and quality. Software is not governed by the perhaps the most difficult problem in engi- physical laws of nature: there is no equivalent of neering today, and has been recognized as such Ohm's Law, which governs the flow of electricity in a for more than 15 years. It is often referred to as circuit; the laws of aerodynamics, which act to keep an the "software crisis".
    [Show full text]
  • Software Engineering and Ethics: When Code Goes Bad
    Software Engineering and Ethics: when code goes bad Once upon a time, estimates for the Strategic Defense Initiative (SDI or ``Star Wars'') claimed that there would be 30 million lines of code, all bug free. This is at least three orders of magnitude greater than ever has been achieved. ... What have we learned since then? 2017 TSP (MSc CCN) 1 Lecture Plan It is a bad plan that admits of no modification Publilius Syrus •Software Crisis •Ethics •Software Engineering •Software Engineering and Ethics •The root of the problem - computer science boundaries? •When code goes bad - education through classic examples •Proposals for the future 2017 TSP (MSc CCN) 2 Software Crisis Do you recognise this? 3 When everyone is wrong Software Engineering and “Bugs” everyone is right Nivelle de La Chaussee QUESTION: What’s the difference between hardware and software ?… buy some hardware and you get a warranty, buy some software and you get a disclaimer The software crisis: •always late Does this really exist? •always over-budget •always buggy •always hard to maintain •always better the next time round … but never is! This doesn’t seem right … where are our ethics? 2017 TSP (MSc CCN) 4 Is there really a crisis? … To avoid crisis, just hire the best people … look at the advances we have made Success in software development depends most upon the quality of the people involved. There is more software to be developed than there are capable developers to do it. Demand for engineers will continue to outstrip supply for the foreseeable future. Complacency has already set in … some firms acknowledge that many of their engineers make negative contribution.
    [Show full text]
  • Arxiv:2105.00534V1 [Cs.SE] 2 May 2021 Solutions
    Metadata Interpretation Driven Development J´ulioG.S.F. da Costaa,d, Reinaldo A. Pettac,d, Samuel Xavier-de-Souzaa,b,d, aGraduate Program of Electrical and Computer Engineering bDepartamento de Engenharia de Computa¸c~aoe Automa¸c~ao cDepartamento de Geologia dUniversidade Federal do Rio Grande do Norte, Natal, RN, Brazil, 59078-900 Abstract Context: Despite decades of engineering and scientific research efforts, sep- aration of concerns in software development remains not fully achieved. The ultimate goal is to truly allow code reuse without large maintenance and evo- lution costs. The challenge has been to avoid the crosscutting of concerns phe- nomenon, which has no apparent complete solution. Objective: In this paper, we show that business-domain code inscriptions play an even larger role in this challenge than the crosscutting of concerns. We then introduce a new methodology, called Metadata Interpretation Driven Develop- ment (MIDD) that suggests a possible path to realize separation of concerns by removing functional software concerns from the coding phase. Method: We propose a change in the perspective for building software, from being based on object representation at the coding level to being based on ob- ject interpretation, whose definitions are put into layers of representation other than coding. The metadata of the domain data is not implemented at the level of the code. Instead, they are interpreted at run time. Results: As an important consequence, such constructs can be applied across functional requirements, across business domains, with no concerns regarding the need to rewrite or refactor code. We show how this can increase the (re)use of the constructs.
    [Show full text]
  • Edsger Wybe Dijkstra
    In Memoriam Edsger Wybe Dijkstra (1930–2002) Contents 0 Early Years 2 1 Mathematical Center, Amsterdam 3 2 Eindhoven University of Technology 6 3 Burroughs Corporation 8 4 Austin and The University of Texas 9 5 Awards and Honors 12 6 Written Works 13 7 Prophet and Sage 14 8 Some Memorable Quotations 16 Edsger Wybe Dijkstra, Professor Emeritus in the Computer Sciences Department at the University of Texas at Austin, died of cancer on 6 August 2002 at his home in Nuenen, the Netherlands. Dijkstra was a towering figure whose scientific contributions permeate major domains of computer science. He was a thinker, scholar, and teacher in renaissance style: working alone or in a close-knit group on problems of long-term importance, writing down his thoughts with exquisite precision, educating students to appreciate the nature of scientific research, and publicly chastising powerful individuals and institutions when he felt scientific integrity was being compromised for economic or political ends. In the words of Professor Sir Tony Hoare, FRS, delivered by him at Dijkstra’s funeral: Edsger is widely recognized as a man who has thought deeply about many deep questions; and among the deepest questions is that of traditional moral philosophy: How is it that a person should live their life? Edsger found his answer to this question early in his life: He decided he would live as an academic scientist, conducting research into a new branch of science, the science of computing. He would lay the foundations that would establish computing as a rigorous scientific discipline; and in his research and in his teaching and in his writing, he would pursue perfection to the exclusion of all other concerns.
    [Show full text]
  • Unit Structure: 1.1 Software Crisis 1.2 Software Evaluation 1.3 POP (Procedure Oriented Programming) 1.4 OOP (Object Oriented
    Unit Structure: 1.1 Software crisis 1.2 Software Evaluation 1.3 POP (Procedure Oriented Programming) 1.4 OOP (Object Oriented Programming) 1.5 Basic concepts of OOP 1.5.1 Objects 1.5.2 Classes 1.5.3 Data Abstraction and Data Encapsulation 1.5.4 Inheritance 1.5.5 Polymorphism 1.5.6 Dynamic Binding 1.5.7 Message Passing 1.6 Benefits of OOP 1.7 Object Oriented Language 1.8 Application of OOP 1.9 Introduction of C++ 1.9.1 Application of C++ 1.10 Simple C++ Program 1.10.1 Program Features 1.10.2 Comments 1.10.3 Output Operators 1.10.4 iostream File 1.10.5 Namespace 1.10.6 Return Type of main () 1.11 More C++ Statements 1.11.1 Variable 1.11.2 Input Operator 1.11.3 Cascading I/O Operator 1.12 Example with Class 1.13 Structure of C++ 1.14 Creating Source File 1.15 Compiling and Linking Page 1 1.1 Software Crisis Developments in software technology continue to be dynamic. New tools and techniques are announced in quick succession. This has forced the software engineers and industry to continuously look for new approaches to software design and development, and they are becoming more and more critical in view of the increasing complexity of software systems as well as the highly competitive nature of the industry. These rapid advances appear to have created a situation of crisis within the industry. The following issued need to be addressed to face the crisis: • How to represent real-life entities of problems in system design? • How to design system with open interfaces? • How to ensure reusability and extensibility of modules? • How to develop modules that are tolerant of any changes in future? • How to improve software productivity and decrease software cost? • How to improve the quality of software? • How to manage time schedules? 1.2 Software Evaluation Ernest Tello, A well known writer in the field of artificial intelligence, compared the evolution of software technology to the growth of the tree.
    [Show full text]
  • Chapter 3, on Structured Programming
    131 on structured programming "In the light of all these difficul- ties the simple approach may be the best." W.F.C. Purser (1976) Software for local multi-mini proc- essor systems. In: 'Multiprocessor Systems', Info- tech State of the Art Report, pg. 408. 132 Contents Chapter Three 1. Introduction pg. 133 1. The origination of structured programming 133 2. The software crisis 135 3. Structured programming and problem solving 136 2. Survey of Structured Programming Techniques 139 1. Restrictions 139 2. Abstraction 141 3. Stepwise refinement 142 4. Notation 143 • Data representation 143 • Flowcharts 145 • Documentation 147 • Programming Languages 148 3. Discussion: Criticisms on Structured Programming 150 1. Pragmatics 150 2. Complexity 150 3. Rigidity 151 4. Methodology 155 4. Conclusion 157 , 5. References Chapter Three 158 Appendix B: Graph Generation and Complexity Measures 161 References Appendix A 167 133 CHAPTER THREE ON STRUCTURED PROGRAMMING 3.1. INTRODUCTION One conclusion we can draw from the discussion in chapter two is that correct- ness proving is by no means a trivial task, neither for sequential programs nor for concurrent programs. The available analysis tools are not powerful enough to allow for the verification of just any program. By necessity one must re- strict oneself to simple and well-structured programs. But, one may ask, what is a well-structured program? Fortunately, there is a wealth of literature on this subject. The larger part of this literature is primarily concerned with sequential programs, but still we should take careful notice of these theories if we want to be able to apply the underlying principles to the multiprocessing cases.
    [Show full text]
  • SHORT HISTORY of SOFTWARE METHODS by David F. Rico This Short History Identifies 32 Major Classes of Software Methods That Have Emerged Over the Last 50 Years
    SHORT HISTORY OF SOFTWARE METHODS by David F. Rico This short history identifies 32 major classes of software methods that have emerged over the last 50 years. There are many variations of each major class of software method, which renders the number of software methods in the hundreds. This short history contains a brief synopsis of each of the 32 major classes of software methods, identifying the decade and year they appeared, their purpose, their major tenets, their strengths, and their weaknesses. The year each software method appeared corresponds to the seminal work that introduced the method based on extensive bibliographic research and the strengths and weaknesses were based on scholarly and empirical works to provide an objective capstone for each method. Mainframe Era Midrange Era Microcomputer Era Internet Era Personalized Era 1960s 1970s 1980s 1990s 2000s Flowcharting Structured Design Formal Specification Software Estimation Software Reliability Iterative/Incremental Software Inspections Structured Analysis Software Testing Configuration Control Quality Assurance Project Management Defect Prevention Process Improvement CASE Tools Object Oriented Software Reuse Rapid Prototyping Concurrent Lifecycle Software Factory Domain Analysis Quality Management Risk Management Software Architecture Software Metrics Six Sigma Buy versus Make Personal Processes Product Lines Synch-n-Stabilize Team Processes Agile Methods Market Conditions Market Conditions Market Conditions Market Conditions Market Conditions y Mainframe computer y Computer
    [Show full text]
  • A Structured Programming Approach to Data Ebook
    A STRUCTURED PROGRAMMING APPROACH TO DATA PDF, EPUB, EBOOK Coleman | 222 pages | 27 Aug 2012 | Springer-Verlag New York Inc. | 9781468479874 | English | New York, NY, United States A Structured Programming Approach to Data PDF Book File globbing in Linux. It seems that you're in Germany. De Marco's approach [13] consists of the following objects see figure : [12]. Get print book. Bibliographic information. There is no reason to discard it. No Downloads. Programming is becoming a technology, a theory known as structured programming is developing. Visibility Others can see my Clipboard. From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. ALGOL 60 implementation Call stack Concurrency Concurrent programming Cooperating sequential processes Critical section Deadly embrace deadlock Dining philosophers problem Dutch national flag problem Fault-tolerant system Goto-less programming Guarded Command Language Layered structure in software architecture Levels of abstraction Multithreaded programming Mutual exclusion mutex Producer—consumer problem bounded buffer problem Program families Predicate transformer semantics Process synchronization Self-stabilizing distributed system Semaphore programming Separation of concerns Sleeping barber problem Software crisis Structured analysis Structured programming THE multiprogramming system Unbounded nondeterminism Weakest precondition calculus. Comments and Discussions. The code block runs at most once. Latest Articles. Show all. How any system is developed can be determined through a data flow diagram. The result of structured analysis is a set of related graphical diagrams, process descriptions, and data definitions. Therefore, when changes are made to that type of data, the corresponding change must be made at each location that acts on that type of data within the program. It means that the program uses single-entry and single-exit elements.
    [Show full text]
  • The Role of Features and Aspects in Software Development
    The Role of Features and Aspects in Software Development Dissertation zur Erlangung des akademischen Grades Doktoringenieur (Dr.-Ing.) angenommen durch die Fakultät für Informatik der Otto-von-Guericke-Universität Magdeburg von: Diplom-Informatiker Sven Apel geboren am 21.04.1977 in Osterburg Gutachter: Prof. Dr. Gunter Saake Prof. Don Batory, Ph.D. Prof. Christian Lengauer, Ph.D. Promotionskolloquium: Magdeburg, Germany, 21.03.2007 Apel, Sven: The Role of Features and Aspects in Software Development Dissertation, Otto-von-Guericke-Universität Magdeburg, Germany, 2006. Abstract In the 60s and 70s the software engineering offensive emerged from long-standing prob- lems in software development, which are captured by the term software crisis. Though there has been significant progress since then, the current situation is far from satisfac- tory. According to the recent report of the Standish Group, still only 34% of all software projects succeed. Since the early days, two fundamental principles drive software engineering research to cope with the software crisis: separation of concerns and modularity. Building software according to these principles is supposed to improve its understandability, maintainabil- ity, reusability, and customizability. But it turned out that providing adequate concepts, methods, formalisms, and tools is difficult. This dissertation aspires to contribute to this field. Specifically, we target the two novel programming paradigms feature-oriented programming (FOP) and aspect-oriented pro- gramming (AOP) that have been discussed intensively in the literature. Both paradigms focus on a specific class of design and implementation problems, which are called cross- cutting concerns. A crosscutting concern is a single design decision or issue whose imple- mentation typically is scattered throughout the modules of a software system.
    [Show full text]
  • The Software-Research Crisis
    The Research Crisis ROBERTL. GLASS,Computing Trends With the advantage of computing and software research are ’ using only one of them. Even though more than 25 years’ hindsight, certainly glad we’ve been able to put we now understand how terribly limit- this twenty-first century author the “research crisis” behind us. ’ ing that approach was, it is easy to see, What was this crisis? It was the in retrospect, why computer scientists looks askance at the “misis”in realization that occurred, right around , could not see the error in their ways. the turn of the century, that research Before I continue, I think it is software practice and expresses in computing and software - as it was worth spending a moment or two deep concern fir a Cris in then focused - was all too often both elaborating on the term research crisis. arrogant and narrow. ’ There is a fine irony to it, and the software research. It was arrogant because many corn- story makes good telling. puting researchers of that era were ~ To understand this research crisis, doing research in a topic they thought it is important that we confront and they understood, but didn’t. It is deal with a prior “software crisis.” amazing that, in retrospect, those ’ It has been about 50 years now computer scientists simply didn’t since the software community coined know what they didn’t know. , the term sojhuare crisis. It was invented It was narrow because, of all the at a conference predominantly attend- possible research models twentieth , ed by theorists rather than practition- century computer scientists might ers, but still, at the outset, almost 42 07407459/94/$04 W 0 1994 IEEE NOVEMBER 1994 everyone agreed there was some validi- ing Office on the problems of building resentment by software practitioners ty to the term.
    [Show full text]
  • The Parallel Programming Landscape
    THE STATE OF Parallel Programming The Parallel Programming Landscape Multicore has gone mainstream — but are developers ready? An Exclusive Research Report arallel computing is the primary way that processor The proliferation of multicore processors means manufacturers are dealing with the physical limits that software developers must incorporate P of transistor-based processor technology. Multiple parallelism into their programming in order processors — or cores — are joined together on a single inte- to achieve increased application performance. grated circuit to provide increased performance and better But many programmers are ill-equipped for energy efficiency than using a single processor. Multicore parallel programming, lacking the requisite technology is now standard in desktop and laptop computers. training and often relying on primitive devel- Mobile computing devices like smartphones and tablets are opment tools. The research shows that better also incorporating multicore processors into their designs. and simpler tools and libraries are needed to The problem with multicore computing is that help programmers parallelize their code and software applications no longer automatically benefit from to debug the complex concurrency bugs that improvements in processor performance the way they did parallelism exposes. in the past. Those benefits can only be realized by writing applications that expect and take advantage of parallelism. Sponsored by The State of Parallel Programming In 2006, Saman Amarasinghe, now a computer science Figure 2. How important is parallel programming to your work? professor at MIT, described this as a “looming software Not sure 1 crisis” for software developers who write code on platforms Critical – our software would not Not important – our 8% that abstract away processor architecture and who therefore software would not work without parallelism benefit from parallelism don’t know how to benefit from parallelism.
    [Show full text]
  • Copyrighted Material
    1 Part I The Software Landscape COPYRIGHTED MATERIAL 3 1 Software Crisis 2.0 Brian Fitzgerald Lero – The Irish Software Research Centre, University of Limerick, Limerick, Ireland 1.1 Software Crisis 1.0 In 1957, the eminent computer scientist, Edsger Dijkstra, sought to record his profession as “Computer Programmer” on his marriage certificate. The Dutch authorities, probably more progressive than most, refused on the grounds that there was no such profession. Ironically, just a decade later, the term “software crisis” had been coined, as delegates at an international conference in 1968 reported a common set of problems, namely that software took too long to develop, cost too much to develop, and the software which was eventually delivered did not meet user expectations. In the early years of computing during the 1940s, the computer was primarily used for scientific problem solving. A computer was needed principally because of its speed of mathematical capability, useful in areas such as the calculation of missile trajectories, aerodynamics, and seismic data analysis. The users of computers at the time were typically scientific researchers with a strong mathematical or engineering background who developed their own programs to address the particular areas in which they were carrying out research. For example, one of the early computers, ENIAC (Electronic Numerical Integrator and Calculator), which became operational in 1945, by the time it was taken out of service in 1955 “had probably done more arithmetic than had been done by the whole human race prior to 1945” [1]. During the 1950s, the use of computers began to spread beyond that of scientific problem solving to address the area of business data processing [2].
    [Show full text]