> 10 years from now > we will simply ask a machine to write software for us
I first heard that argument some 40 years ago. It wasn't true then, and it isn't true now. The reason for this is simple - code generation is a purely mechanical process, but defining the solution to the problem space requires semantic understanding, and that is the stuff of sci-fi. Many years ago, I was involved in writing some tools for Z. The idea was that a non-programmer could specify what he wanted, and then the Z compiler would generate the code. The project was a spectacular failure, because it turns out that getting that spec to be complete and accurate is exactly the same job as writing the code - the spec and the implementation can be considered synonymous. And this situation will persist until an AI is created that can properly *understand* a requirement. I don't know if we will ever get to that point - it's not just AI, it's Artificial Consciousness - but it won't happen in my lifetime. > There may be more systems, but the natural evolution > will concentrate knowledge into fewer and fewer parts. Why? Simple laws of supply and demand imply that any such shrinkage will make the trade more attractive, and so lead to more recruits... > the few commodity roles will be passed to the lowest bidder > and this will mostly be offshore. Roles are tending to be onshored at the moment - top management is finally beginning to understand that the Man-Month is indeed Mythical. > Math has a natural use in all subjects and life skills Not on this side of the Atlantic, it doesn't... Vic. -- Please post to: Hampshire@mailman.lug.org.uk Web Interface: https://mailman.lug.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/hampshire LUG URL: http://www.hantslug.org.uk --------------------------------------------------------------
