Royal Pain
Peter L. Peres
plp-ysDPMY98cNQDDBjDh4tngg at public.gmane.org
Sat Jun 19 01:43:11 UTC 2004
> On Fri, Jun 18, 2004 at 07:27:26AM -0400, James Knott wrote:
> > And of course, it's impossible to prove there are no bugs. You can only
> > fail to find some.
>
> That is actually not true. If you have a well defined specification of
> what the behaviour of each piece of the program must be for specific
> inputs, you can actually prove the behaviour of each part of the program
> correct. This is in fact done at some software companies. It is
> certainly a lot more work and costs more. It requires proper bounds
> checks, and full coverage testing at the very least.
The only thing that is reasonably certain and provable is the fact that
for any given manufacturing/testing error rate the number of bugs is
proportional to the size of the object involved, specifications included.
So a very elaborate, detailed specification may in fact have more bugs
than a simple, terse one, and they may be much harder to find and correct.
;-)
Peter
--
The Toronto Linux Users Group. Meetings: http://tlug.ss.org
TLUG requests: Linux topics, No HTML, wrap text below 80 columns
How to UNSUBSCRIBE: http://tlug.ss.org/subscribe.shtml
More information about the Legacy
mailing list