Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!olivea!mintaka!ai-lab!rice-chex!bson
From: bson@rice-chex.ai.mit.edu (Jan Brittenson)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.handhelds
Subject: Re: Re: The mythical bug-free code
Keywords: hp48
Message-ID: <13273@life.ai.mit.edu>
Date: 9 Feb 91 01:20:09 GMT
References: <C6808B1C181F60B9E7@ISUVAX.BITNET> <13218@life.ai.mit.edu> <27b30231:1922.5comp.sys.handhelds;1@hpcvbbs.UUCP>
Sender: news@ai.mit.edu
Organization: nil
Lines: 35

In a posting of [8 Feb 91 20:40:20 GMT]
   akcs.falco@hpcvbbs.UUCP (Andrey Dolgachev) writes:

 > when HP is going to be replacing you rcalculator for feee, don't spend
 > time on arguing how HP could have found out the bug, and giving me a
 > long-drawn out explanation of how HP could have followed a simple
 > procedure and found the bug, etc., etc.

   Having worked with software quality control (in fact, that's how
many people begin their careers) I find it an interesting issue. If
you don't want to discuss it, well then, don't. I was only trying to
spawn off a fruitful discussion on how HP-48 software can be tested in
general. If you can't stand the thought that someone adds something to
your articles, then you should stop posting, or openly declare this to
be the case, so you can be avoided.


 > You're getting you calculator fixed for free, and in the meantime, try
 > doing something with it.

   Perhaps if you had pondered the issue for another second or two
before starting the great text generator, you might have realized that
once something is done, it needs testing. Or do you push untested
code?

   Not that it bothers me, it's your name after all, not mine. But
please show some respect for those of us who _do_ care.

				* * *

   Now, back to the issue... Can someone explain how HP actually tests
the HP-48?

						-- Jan Brittenson
						   bson@ai.mit.edu