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=-0.5 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID, PP_MIME_FAKE_ASCII_TEXT autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII X-Google-Thread: fac41,a48e5b99425d742a X-Google-Attributes: gidfac41,public X-Google-Thread: 103376,a48e5b99425d742a X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-Thread: 1108a1,5da92b52f6784b63 X-Google-Attributes: gid1108a1,public X-Google-Thread: f43e6,a48e5b99425d742a X-Google-Attributes: gidf43e6,public X-Google-Thread: 107d55,a48e5b99425d742a X-Google-Attributes: gid107d55,public From: Nick Leaton Subject: Re: Ariane-5: can you clarify? (Re: Please do not start a language war) Date: 1997/03/20 Message-ID: <33316378.51C5@calfp.co.uk>#1/1 X-Deja-AN: 227031269 X-NNTP-Posting-Host: calfp.demon.co.uk References: <332B5495.167EB0E7@eiffel.com> Newsgroups: comp.lang.eiffel,comp.object,comp.software-eng,comp.lang.ada,comp.lang.java.tech Date: 1997-03-20T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: Karel Th�nissen wrote: > > From personal experience I have found this to be the case. Being able to > > test your comments is very useful! > > I fully agree, and every one should do this. But do you get this taught > in software engineering class or do software engineering methods or > languages enforce this? Do project managers require this? > To further clarify my/our point. Right now tens of thousands of > programmers wish that assumptions were more accurately documented in the > code - on the spot - if only by means of informal comments. These > programmers are making our software ready for the Y2000, they know the > assumptions made, if only they could easily find those spots. I was very sceptical about assertions until I started using Eiffel. I am now converted. I would however be interested in a discussion on how exceptions should be handled. 1) Report and fail 2) Have logic. In the Ariane case, just shut down the SRI after launch 3) Fix and retry - could just be wait and retry 4) Try method B Are there any others? -- Nick