Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!hsi!stpstn!cox
From: cox@stpstn.UUCP (Brad Cox)
Newsgroups: comp.software-eng
Subject: Re: Reusability considered harmful??(!!)
Message-ID: <6249@stpstn.UUCP>
Date: 8 Feb 91 00:24:50 GMT
References: <1401@ucl-cs.uucp>
Reply-To: cox@stpstn.UUCP (Brad Cox)
Organization: Stepstone
Lines: 21

In article <1401@ucl-cs.uucp> G.Joly@cs.ucl.ac.uk (Gordon Joly) writes:
>
>Can the tolerance idea get off the starting blocks?
>
I believe that it can, and that it must, for reasons stated near the end
of my Nov 90 IEEE Software article.

The whole question of tolerance for software is fascinating, but seeing
its richness requires dropping the academic notion that software is either
right or wrong (i.e. provable correctness), but an evolving product of
human labor.

I haven't tried to enumerate the full breadth of the tolerance issue, but
here are a couple of starting points: Is this component tolerably fast?
Tolerably small? Tolerably compliant with the previous release? Tolerably
functional? Tolerably close to what the customer wants? Tolerably priced?
Etc, etc, etc.
-- 

Brad Cox; cox@stepstone.com; CI$ 71230,647; 203 426 1875
The Stepstone Corporation; 75 Glen Road; Sandy Hook CT 06482