Talk:David Wheeler (computer scientist)

{{WikiProject banner shell|class=C|blp=no|listas=Wheeler, David|

{{WikiProject Biography|s&a-work-group=yes}}

{{WikiProject Computing|importance=Mid |early-comp=yes |early-comp-importance=High}}

{{WikiProject Cryptography |importance=Low}}

}}

indirection quote: layer or level?

Wheeler is often quoted as saying "Any problem in computer science can be solved with another layer of indirection. But that usually will create another problem."

In his Turing Award lecture at [http://research.microsoft.com/Lampson/Slides/TuringLecture.doc] Butler Lampson attributes the quote to Wheeler using the word "level":

Any problem in computer science can be solved with another level of

indirection. (Wheeler).

But the "layer" term is also often seen. Is there a good citation for it? Or should we change the quote?

--NealMcB (talk) 06:52, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

:I don't have a good citation. I chatted with David about this quote a few weeks before his death and I think he used the word "layer" then. But I don't think he would have considered minor stylistic differences such as whether the word "layer" or "level" is used significant in this context, and it is well possible that he has said both in the past. He did however stress that he considered the inclusion of the – often omitted – second part "But that usually creates another problem." as significant. It is more the spirit that counts than the exact wording. Markus Kuhn (talk) 13:08, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

::Can there be a mathematical proof that any problem in CS can be solved with another level of indirection? Thanks, --Abdull (talk) 11:48, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

:::Strictly speaking, no (of course). But for an informal illustration, consider the (central) role of variables in lambda-calculus, and that each variable binding is an extra level of indirection.—141.150.23.3 (talk) 01:14, 2 August 2009 (UTC)