Xref: utzoo comp.lang.c:26562 comp.software-eng:3053
Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!cs.utexas.edu!usc!brutus.cs.uiuc.edu!apple!oracle!news
From: mfriedma@oracle.com (Michael Friedman)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c,comp.software-eng
Subject: Re: Currency Quotes
Message-ID: <1990Mar4.235537.3757@oracle.com>
Date: 4 Mar 90 23:55:37 GMT
References: <803@xyzzy.UUCP> <8229@hubcap.clemson.edu>
Reply-To: mfriedma@oracle.UUCP (Michael Friedman)
Organization: Oracle Corporation, Belmont, CA
Lines: 49

In article <8229@hubcap.clemson.edu> billwolf%hazel.cs.clemson.edu@hubcap.clemson.edu writes:
>From goudreau@larrybud.rtp.dg.com (Bob Goudreau):
>> I was talking about your original criticism of units(1) for the way
>> its manpage admitted that the program had no way of automatically
>> updating its exchange-rate information in real-time.  You came to
>> the embarassingly stupid conclusion that this limitation was somehow
>> a fault of the C programming language.  But go ahead and defend that
>> conclusion if you must....

>   No, it was an example of the C community's cavalier attitude
>   toward software reliability.  The comment "Don't base your
>   financial plans on the output", or words to that effect, were
>   a) inappropriate, since the static nature of the rates is part
>   of the specification and should not be listed in the defects
>   section, and b) irresponsible, since it indicates a flippant
>   approach to the reliability of the output.

I disagree. 

On point A you are technically correct - the possibly unreliable
nature of the rates is part of the spec.  On the other hand, from the
point of view of producing good results, that note is in exactly the
right place.

It isn't as important with something like Units that has a 2 page man
entry, but say we have something like csh.  I'm not going to read
through a hundred pages looking for caveats and warnings.  I want them
in one simple clear easy to use location - the Bugs section.  One of
the most important things about documentation is to make it useful to
the reader.  That's a lot more important than placing everything
exactly where it belongs according to some static criteria.

On point B I again disagree.

Irresponsible is when someone does something careless or possibly
damaging.  For example, it would be irresponsible to use Units in a
financial application without reading the Bugs section.

Flippant comments in documentation are more evidence that people
aren't overly worreid about frightening away customers, probably
because most customers don't read UNIX man pages.

A flippant approach to reliability is bad.  Why are jokes about
reliability bad?  
--
The passing of Marxism-Leninism first from China and then from the
Soviet Union will mean its death as a living ideology ... .  For while
there may be some isolated true believers left in places like Managua,
Pyongyang, or Cambridge, MA ...   - Francis Fukuyama