Waterfall model

related topics
{system, computer, user}
{theory, work, human}
{company, market, business}
{water, park, boat}
{work, book, publish}
{math, number, function}
{car, race, vehicle}
{build, building, house}
{god, call, give}

The waterfall model is a sequential design process, often used in software development processes, in which progress is seen as flowing steadily downwards (like a waterfall) through the phases of Conception, Initiation, Analysis, Design, Construction, Testing and Maintenance.

The waterfall development model originates in the manufacturing and construction industries; highly structured physical environments in which after-the-fact changes are prohibitively costly, if not impossible. Since no formal software development methodologies existed at the time, this hardware-oriented model was simply adapted for software development.

The first formal description of the waterfall model is often cited as a 1970 article by Winston W. Royce,[1] though Royce did not use the term "waterfall" in this article. Royce presented this model as an example of a flawed, non-working model (Royce 1970). This, in fact, is how the term is generally used in writing about software development—to describe a critical view of a commonly used software practice.[2]



In Royce's original waterfall model, the following phases are followed in order:

The waterfall model proceeds from one phase to the next in a sequential manner. For example, one first completes requirements specification, which after sign-off are considered "set in stone." When requirements are completed, one proceeds to design. The software in question is designed and a blueprint is drawn for implementers (coders) to follow—this design should be a plan for implementing the requirements given. When the design is complete, an implementation of that design is made by coders. Towards the later stages of this implementation phase, separate software components produced are combined to introduce new functionality and reduced risk through the removal of errors.

Thus the waterfall model maintains that one should move to a phase only when its preceding phase is completed and perfected. However, there are various modified waterfall models (including Royce's final model) that may include slight or major variations upon this process.

Supporting arguments

Time spent early in the software production cycle can lead to greater economy at later stages. McConnell shows that a bug found in the early stages (such as requirements specification or design) is cheaper in money, effort, and time, to fix than the same bug found later on in the process. ([McConnell 1996], p. 72, estimates that "...a requirements defect that is left undetected until construction or maintenance will cost 50 to 200 times as much to fix as it would have cost to fix at requirements time.") To take an extreme example, if a program design turns out to be impossible to implement, it is easier to fix the design at the design stage than to realize months later, when program components are being integrated, that all the work done so far has to be scrapped because of a broken design.

Full article ▸

related documents
BNC connector
Streaming media
Microsoft Office
File viewer
Jupiter Ace
Zeta Instrument Processor Interface
Variable bitrate
Plesiochronous Digital Hierarchy
Wine (software)
Audio Interchange File Format
IEEE 802.3
Motorola 68040
Wireless network
Multitier architecture
Protocol data unit
Terminal emulator
Signalling (telecommunications)
Covert listening device
Graphics Device Interface
Routing table