Software Engineering: Software (Just the Quotes)

"Since software construction is inherently a systems effort - an exercise in complex interrelationships - communication effort is great, and it quickly dominates the decrease in individual task time brought about by partitioning [increasing the workers]. Adding more people then lengthens, not shortens, the schedule." (Frederick Brook, "The Mythical Man-Month", 1975)

"The fundamental problem with software maintenance is that fixing a defect has a substantial (20-50 percent) chance of introducing another. So the whole process is two steps forward and one step back. Why aren't defects fixed more cleanly? First, even a subtle defect shows itself as a local failure of some kind. In fact it often has system-wide ramifications, usually nonobvious. Any attempt to fix it with minimum effort will repair the local and obvious, but unless the structure is pure or the documentation very fine, the far-reaching effects of the repair will be overlooked. Second, the repairer is usually not the man who wrote the code, and often he is a junior programmer or trainee. (Frederick P. Brooks, "The Mythical Man-Month" , 1975)

"The hardest single part of building a software system is deciding precisely what to build." (Frederick P. Brooks, "The Mythical Man-Month", 1975) 

"The essence of a software entity is a construct of interlocking concepts: […] I believe the hard part of building software to be the specification, design, and testing of this conceptual construct, not the labor of representing it and testing the fidelity of the representation." (Fred Brooks, "No Silver Bullet", 1986)

"The finest pieces of software are those where one individual has a complete sense of exactly how the program works. To have that, you have to really love the program and concentrate on keeping it simple, to an incredible degree." (Bill Gates , [interview], 1986)

"There are two ways of constructing a software design. One way is to make it so simple that there are obviously no deficiencies. And the other way is to make it so complicated that there are no obvious deficiencies." (Charles A R Hoare, [lecture] 1987)

"Object-oriented programming languages support encapsulation, thereby improving the ability of software to be reused, refined, tested, maintained, and extended. The full benefit of this support can only be realized if encapsulation is maximized during the design process. […] design practices which take a data-driven approach fail to maximize encapsulation because they focus too quickly on the implementation of objects." (Rebecca Wirfs-Brock, "Object-oriented Design: A. responsibility-driven approach", 1989)

"Programmers are responsible for software quality - quality in their own work, quality in the products that incorporate their work, and quality at the interfaces between components. Quality has never been and will never be tested in. The responsibility is both moral and professional." (Boris Beizer, "Software Testing Techniques", 1990)

"The complexity barrier. Software complexity (and therefore that of bugs) grows to the limits of our ability to manage that complexity." (Boris Beizer, "Software Testing Techniques", 1990)

"The most common kind of coding bug, and often considered the least harmful, are documentation bugs (i.e., erroneous comments). Although many documentation bugs are simple spelling errors or the result of poor writing, many are actual errors - that is, misleading or erroneous comments. We can no longer afford to discount such bugs, because their consequences are as great as 'true' coding errors. Today programming labor is dominated by maintenance. This will increase as software becomes even longer-lived. Documentation bugs lead to incorrect maintenance actions and therefore cause the insertion of other bugs." (Boris Beizer, "Software Testing Techniques", 1990)

"Every software system needs to have a simple yet powerful organizational philosophy (think of it as the software equivalent of a sound bite that describes the system's architecture). [A] step in [the] development process is to articulate this architectural framework, so that we might have a stable foundation upon which to evolve the system's function points." (Grady Booch, "Object-Oriented Design: with Applications", 1991)

"The fundamentals of language are not understood to this day. [...] Until we understand languages of communication involving humans as they are then it is unlikely many of our software problems will vanish." (Richard W Hamming, "The Art of Probability for Scientists and Engineers", 1991)

"As the size of software systems increases, the algorithms and data structures of the computation no longer constitute the major design problems. When systems are constructed from many components, the organization of the overall system - the software architecture - presents a new set of design problems. This level of design has been addressed in a number of ways including informal diagrams and descriptive terms, module interconnection languages, templates and frameworks for systems that serve the needs of specific domains, and formal models of component integration mechanisms." (David Garlan & Mary Shaw, "An introduction to software architecture", Advances in software engineering and knowledge engineering Vol 1, 1993)

"Testing by itself does not improve software quality. Test results are an indicator of quality, but in and of themselves, they don't improve it. Trying to improve software quality by increasing the amount of testing is like trying to lose weight by weighing yourself more often. What you eat before you step onto the scale determines how much you will weigh, and the software development techniques you use determine how many errors testing will find. If you want to lose weight, don't buy a new scale; change your diet. If you want to improve your software, don't test more; develop better." (Steve C McConnell, "Code Complete: A Practical Handbook of Software Construction", 1993)

"Software architecture involves the description of elements from which systems are built, interactions among those elements, patterns that guide their composition, and constraints on these patterns. In general, a particular system is defined in terms of a collection of components and interactions among those components. Such a system may in turn be used as a (composite) element in a larger system design." (Mary Shaw & David Garlan,"Characteristics of Higher-Level Languages for Software Architecture", 1994)

"Our experience with designing and analyzing large and complex software-intensive systems has led us to recognize the role of business and organization in the design of the system and in its ultimate success or failure. Systems are built to satisfy an organization's requirements (or assumed requirements in the case of shrink-wrapped products). These requirements dictate the system's performance, availability, security, compatibility with other systems, and the ability to accommodate change over its lifetime. The desire to satisfy these goals with software that has the requisite properties influences the design choices made by a software architect." (Len Bass et al, "Software Architecture in Practice", 1998)

"Generically, an architecture is the description of the set of components and the relationships between them. […] A software architecture describes the layout of the software modules and the connections and relationships among them. A hardware architecture can describe how the hardware components are organized. However, both these definitions can apply to a single computer, a single information system, or a family of information systems. Thus 'architecture' can have a range of meanings, goals, and abstraction levels, depending on who’s speaking." (Frank J Armour et al, "A big-picture look at enterprise architectures", IT professional Vol 1 (1), 1999)

"Planning is not about predicting the future. When you make a plan for developing a piece of software, development is not going to go like that. Not ever. Your customers wouldn’t even be happy if it did, because by the time software gets there, the customers don’t want what was planned, they want something different." (Kent Beck & Martin Fowler, "Planning Extreme Programming", 2000)

"Design patterns provide the cores of ready-made solutions that can be used to solve many of software’s most common problems. Some software problems require solutions that are derived from first principles. But most problems are similar to past problems, and those can be solved using similar solutions, or patterns." (Steve C McConnell, "Code Complete: A Practical Handbook of Software Construction" 2nd Ed., 2004)

"The software architecture of a system or a family of systems has one of the most significant impacts on the quality of an organization's enterprise architecture. While the design of software systems concentrates on satisfying the functional requirements for a system, the design of the software architecture for systems concentrates on the nonfunctional or quality requirements for systems. These quality requirements are concerns at the enterprise level. The better an organization specifies and characterizes the software architecture for its systems, the better it can characterize and manage its enterprise architecture. By explicitly defining the systems software architectures, an organization will be better able to reflect the priorities and trade-offs that are important to the organization in the software that it builds." (James McGovern et al, "A Practical Guide to Enterprise Architecture", 2004)

"A road plan can show the exact location, elevation, and dimensions of any part of the structure. The map corresponds to the structure, but it's not the same as the structure. Software, on the other hand, is just a codification of the behaviors that the programmers and users want to take place. The map is the same as the structure. […] This means that software can only be described accurately at the level of individual instructions. […] A map or a blueprint for a piece of software must greatly simplify the representation in order to be comprehensible. But by doing so, it becomes inaccurate and ultimately incorrect. This is an important realization: any architecture, design, or diagram we create for software is essentially inadequate. If we represent every detail, then we're merely duplicating the software in another form, and we're wasting our time and effort." (George Stepanek, "Software Project Secrets: Why Software Projects Fail", 2005)

"Software is abstract and therefore seems as if it should be infinitely malleable. And yet, for all its ethereal flexibility, it can be stubbornly, maddeningly intractable, and it is constantly surprising us with its rigidity." (Scott Rosenberg, "Dreaming in Code", 2007)

"Software is different; it has no core. It is onionlike, a thing of layers, each built painstakingly and precariously on the previous one, each counting on the one below not to move or change too much. Software builders like to talk about laying bricks; skeptics see a house of cards. Either way, there’s a steady accumulation going on. New layers pile on old. Programmers call these accretions 'layers of abstraction', because each time a new one is added, something complex and specific is being translated into something simpler and more general." (Scott Rosenberg, "Dreaming in Code", 2007)

"Software is easy to make, except when you want it to do something new. And then, of course, there is a corollary: The only software that's worth making is software that does something new." (Scott Rosenberg, "Dreaming in Code", 2007)

"The names programmers adopt for their abstractions are, as geeks like to say, 'nontrivial'. In software, labels and names matter; they are the handles by which you grab things." (Scott Rosenberg, "Dreaming in Code", 2007)

"There is almost always something you can pull off the shelf that will satisfy many of your needs. But usually the parts of what you need done that your off-the-shelf code won’t handle are the very parts that make your new project different, unique, innovative - and they’re why you’re building it in the first place." (Scott Rosenberg, "Dreaming in Code", 2007)

"We tend to form mental models that are simpler than reality; so if we create represented models that are simpler than the actual implementation model, we help the user achieve a better understanding. […] Understanding how software actually works always helps someone to use it, but this understanding usually comes at a significant cost. One of the most significant ways in which computers can assist human beings is by putting a simple face on complex processes and situations. As a result, user interfaces that are consistent with users’ mental models are vastly superior to those that are merely reflections of the implementation model." (Alan Cooper et al,  "About Face 3: The Essentials of Interaction Design", 2007)

"Part of the beauty of software is that it’s deterministic - the computer does exactly what you tell it to do, and, given the same starting point, it will do exactly the same thing every time." (Paul Butcher, "Debug It! Find, Repair, and Prevent Bugs in Your Code", 2009)

"Writing and (particularly) maintaining software is a continual battle against entropy. Keeping on top of quality is tough, requiring high levels of discipline. This discipline is difficult enough to maintain under the best of circumstances, let alone when faced with concrete evidence that the software is uncared for, such as a long-unfixed bug. As soon as discipline slips, quality can go into a self-reinforcing downward spiral, and you’re in real trouble." (Paul Butcher, "Debug It! Find, Repair, and Prevent Bugs in Your Code", 2009)

"We developers can easily develop blind spots. We necessarily have a different perspective from our users, and that can mean we miss important information that would be obvious to someone who understands things from their point of view. Furthermore, our focus tends to be on working out how to make the software work, not proving that it’s broken." (Paul Butcher, "Debug It! Find, Repair, and Prevent Bugs in Your Code", 2009)

"Refactoring is the process of changing a software system in such a way that it does not alter the external behavior of the code yet improves its internal structure. It is a disciplined way to clean up code that minimizes the chances of introducing bugs. In essence when you refactor you are improving the design of the code after it has been written." (Jay Fields et al, "Refactoring: Ruby Edition", 2010)

"An obsession with 'feature delivery' ignores the human-related and team-related dynamics inherent in modern software, leading to a lack of engagement from staff, especially when the cognitive load is exceeded." (Matthew Skelton, "Team Topologies: Organizing Business and Technology Teams for Fast Flow", 2019)

"Trying to determine the cognitive load of software using simple measures such as lines of code, number of modules, classes, or methods is misguided. […] When measuring cognitive load, what we really care about is the domain complexity - how complex is the problem that we’re trying to solve with software? A domain is a more largely applicable concept than software size." (Matthew Skelton, "Team Topologies: Organizing Business and Technology Teams for Fast Flow", 2019)

"One of the great enemies of design is when systems or objects become more complex than a person - or even a team of people - can keep in their heads. This is why software is generally beneath contempt." (Bran Ferren)

"The thing that makes software design difficult is that we must express thoughts about a problem and a solution we typically do not understand fully, using a language that does not contain many of our accustomed features of expression, to a system that is unforgiving of mistakes." (Alistair Cockburn)