From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me X-Spam-Level: *** X-Spam-Status: No, score=3.8 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID, RATWARE_MS_HASH,RATWARE_OUTLOOK_NONAME autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: f43e6,2c6139ce13be9980 X-Google-Attributes: gidf43e6,public X-Google-Thread: 1108a1,2c6139ce13be9980 X-Google-Attributes: gid1108a1,public X-Google-Thread: fac41,2c6139ce13be9980 X-Google-Attributes: gidfac41,public X-Google-Thread: 103376,3d3f20d31be1c33a X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public From: "Veli-Pekka Nousiainen" Subject: Re: Interface/Implementation (was Re: Design by Contract) Date: 1997/09/11 Message-ID: <01bcbeed$5a692ca0$0100007f@Yeif-1.eiffel.fi>#1/1 X-Deja-AN: 271668686 References: <340F20A0.49B5@ac3i.dseg.ti.com> <340F39E3.4B71@pseserv3.fw.hac.com> <5v32se$l7u$1@miranda.gmrc.gecm.com> Organization: AMT Oy Newsgroups: comp.object,comp.software-eng,comp.lang.ada,comp.lang.eiffel Date: 1997-09-11T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: Robert Dewar wrote in article ... > Paul says > > <<(2) is an interesting possibility. Most organisations with configuration > control have some kind of test or inspection procedure before release. > Either of these would be sufficient to enforce the existing interface. > Tests would fail with changed interfaces, and inspectors would reject > changed interfaces precisely because they will break existing software.>> > > This misses the point. That is like saying, never mind we don't need CM > at all, because our integration testing will catch any errors. > > You cannot rely on test and inspection to catch errors. The whole point > of high quality software production procedures, such as are enforced > by typical ISO 9000 registrations, or high CMM level organizations, is > that every element of the production process is well controlled. > > If lack of proper CM has allowed interfaces to wander, then who knows > what other resultant errors have been produced. > > Perhaps the real truth is that there are not many organizations using > Eiffel for large critical programs. A simple question, does anyone know > of an organization using Eiffel that is a CMM level of 3 or higher, or > which has received ISO 9000 certification (I do not mean to imply that > these are the *only* valid measures, but they are indicative. > You got me ! Please, anybody - help. More info about CM & Eiffel !!! For what use it is to have the best of the world - DbC when rest of the quality is below that !? >