Re: Would You Fly an Airplane with a Linux-Based Control System?

["Dmitry A. Kazakov" <mailbox@dmitry-kazakov.de>]

On Sat, 27 Nov 2004 01:31:12 +0000, Marius Amado Alves wrote:

> Rod Haper wrote:
>> The "bug" that got "fixed" was the specification.  That in turn 
>> necessitated a change to the software to comply with the updated 
>> specification.  The "error" was in the old Ariane IV's specification's 
>> lack of applicability to the new Ariane V's requirements.  The "failure" 
>> was one of design, not software implementation, and was independent of 
>> what language was or might have been used for the implementation.
>> 
>> What is your point vis-a-vis hardware or software?  The "conclusion" I 
>> draw is that you seem to be hung up on some agenda which ignores the 
>> simple facts of the case.
> 
> My agenda is to make sure things are called by their names with no 
> guilt. A bug is a bug is a bug.

There is no such thing as bug without semantics. Absolutely any program is
both buggy and correct depending on what it is supposed to do.

> A specification is a software item.

A specification of a program is not a part of the program. It is a part of
the software development process.

> A defect in a specification is a bug.

Maybe, but it is not a bug *in* the program that implements that
specification.

-- 
Regards,
Dmitry A. Kazakov
http://www.dmitry-kazakov.de