Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!usc!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!munnari.oz.au!bruce!trlluna!titan!amos!hogg From: hogg@amos.trl.oz.au (Stephanie Hogg) Newsgroups: comp.software-eng Subject: Re: Provocative statement Message-ID: <1991May9.044816.2709@trl.oz.au> Date: 9 May 91 04:48:16 GMT References: <9776@castle.ed.ac.uk> <1991Apr25.133216.20855@jyu.fi> <1991May3.195844.25823@dg-rtp.dg.com> <34081@mimsy.umd.edu> Sender: news@trl.oz.au (USENET News System) Reply-To: hogg@amos.trl.oz.au (Stephanie Hogg) Organization: Telecom Research Laboratories, Melbourne, Australia Lines: 23 In article <34081@mimsy.umd.edu>, straub@jogger.cs.umd.edu (Pablo A. Straub) writes: > ... > Yes, you can engineer software robustness. But let's not stretch the > analogy to far. Software is still not continuous and robustness is not > achieved by adding more of the same. As Jim Showalter explained to us, > program robustness is achieved by changing the design, not just adding > more code. > I hope you don't really think that safety in say building a bridge is a result of adding a few more tonnes of concrete. What if that concrete went in the wrong place? Safety in all engineering fields is (hopefully!) achieved by design. > Pablo Straub Stephanie Hogg ________________________________________________________________________ Stephanie Hogg Internet: s.hogg@trl.oz.au Telecom Research Laboratories PO Box 249 Clayton 3168 Phone: +61 3 541 6802 Victoria, Australia Fax: +61 3 543 1944 ________________________________________________________________________