tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2359949979858824307.post5249979324663491355..comments2014-03-01T18:26:37.373-08:00Comments on Real Software Components & Real CBD for Software: The scientific process is broken and to fix it I must find real software scientists & researchers who really care about science & technologyAnonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09834194277539725731noreply@blogger.comBlogger1125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2359949979858824307.post-9259288089020433902013-11-27T03:52:12.858-08:002013-11-27T03:52:12.858-08:00I felt that I need to provide a brief proof to sho...I felt that I need to provide a brief proof to show that software researchers violated basic scientific principles 45 years ago, when they defined software components. A Brief proof is at:<br />http://real-software-components.blogspot.in/2013/11/the-process-of-scientific-research-is.html.<br /><br />The error 45 years ago was understandable because then most popular programming language is FORTRAN, the compilers is still in infancy and benefits of structure programming was still debated.<br /><br />But the problem is no one ever tried to validate those assumptions made 45 years ago, because OOP (Object-Oriented programming) is in existence for over 30 years. The OOP is capable of creating many other kinds of software-parts including software-parts equivalent to the physical functional components (e.g. by having unique essential properties universally shared by physical functional components).<br /><br />The research on so called software components (i.e. this term is used as a synonym to software parts) started gaining traction before 1970 and at any time since 1970 tens of thousands of researchers and experts have been working very hard to advance the CBSD by relying on the earlier definitions for software components. This brute force resulted in evolution of a complex paradigm comprising many layers of interdependent concepts (e.g. as researchers publish research papers by relying on then existing papers) over the decades.<br /><br />The software engineering paradigm must have already entrenched sufficiently by 1980s by the time OOP beginning to gain traction. Hence the concepts of software components are already entrenched into the collective wisdom of software industry. Since CBSD predated OOP by over a decade and half, no one found a reason to doubt the validity of the definitions for software components. Furthermore, it is very complex to discover hidden nature of physical functional components. I first defined the real-CBD and set the goal that real-software-components must achieve real-CBD, which was tremendously helpful in discovering the hidden essential properties of the functional-components. <br /><br />Also I feel it was lucky accident at right time of my life that I could afford to undertake this long risky research: I first invented a GUI-API that was capable of replaceable-components and built hierarchies of replaceable components (I had three patents on this GUI-API). I was fascinated by the ease at which even junior developers able to build many layers of component-hierarchies. I didn’t know what they were, but I was sure that I stumbled on to something very useful. After that point it took me many years of passionate research to come to this point.<br />Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09834194277539725731noreply@blogger.com