User Profile

It's an interesting book, and a useful one because everything is backed up by studies and empirical research. It has three different categories: laws, hypotheses and conjectures.

The laws are solid and unobjectionable, if a bit stodgy. A few examples from the appendix:

A system that is used will be changed. (Lehman)
Testing can show the presence but not the absence of errors. (Dijkstra)
Good designs require deep application domain knowledge. (Curtis)

The hypotheses are a little looser:

Object oriented programs are difficult to maintain (Wilde)
Object oriented designs reduce errors and encourage reuse (Booch)
Group behavior depends on the level of attention given (Hawthorne)

And the conjectures are much the same:

Distribution ends where the customer wants it to end.
Process improvements require action based feedback.
* Measurements are always based on actually used models rather than on desired ones.

Which is fine, as far as it goes. You can't really argue with the conclusions. However, it is slightly out of date, even having been published in 2003 -- no-one really objects to object oriented programs these days, and discussion about CASE tools is more along the lines of "where are they now" rather than an actual discussion. However, there are solid sections on static and dynamic verification that work very well as an introduction to methods that many programmers may not be familiar with.

This isn't a book you'll pick up and read every weekend. It's far too theoretical and abstract. However, it's an excellent way to formalize thought and use as a touchstone when you're concerned about the theory.

I like Carroll. I think part of the reason for that is because Carroll's world is always emotionally valid. The characters have insane things happen to them, but it's always a reflection of their inner feelings -- the fantasy arises from the inner dialogue and struggle being externalized.

That is, when Isabelle has to travel back to see her lover, she has past selves and behaviors trying to derail her and throw obstacles in her path. In this world, there are literally copies of her trying to run her off the road and throwing giant rocks ahead of her on the freeway.

With this in mind, it makes sense if you realize that Carroll is talking about emotional truth. It's not supposed to make sense. It's the insanity of realizing that the world around you is as crazy as you are.

The irony is that I don't like Murakami, because on the spur of a moment a character can find himself brutalizing a stranger with a baseball bat, and feel fine about it afterwards. Carroll never does that -- even the death and the amnesia, although cliched, makes sense in context of the forbidden affair and breakup. That's because, under the hood, they are the same thing.