From: rracine@myremarq.com (Roger Racine)
Subject: Re: Business Week (12/6/99 issue) article on Software Quality
Date: 1999/12/10
Date: 1999-12-10T13:06:10+00:00 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <3850f619.952080909@newsnew.draper.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: 82p3vo$k8v$1@nntp3.atl.mindspring.net
On Thu, 09 Dec 1999 20:42:14 GMT, Richard D Riehle
<laoXhai@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
>In article <384ffd52.888393602@newsnew.draper.com>,
> rracine@myremarq.com (Roger Racine) wrote:
>
>>Why don't you look up the meaning in Robert's reference? There is no
>>difference. A bug is a mistake that has not been diagnosed. The
>>cause is not known, but the effect is seen. As if there were a bug in
>>the system mucking things up.
>
>Ah, but we see the term being used, instead, for mistakes that are
>diagnosed, simply not yet corrected, as in "known bugs." Further,
>you have just acknowledged that a bug is just another word for
>a mistake. Thank you.
>
The IEEE Standard Dictionary of Electrical and Electronics Terms has
this definition:
-----------------------
bug (2) (software). See: fault.
fault (7) (software). (2) A manifestation of an error in software.
Syn: bug.
----------------------
I do not think anyone is arguing against the idea that a bug is a
fault is caused by a mistake and that is an error. Synonyms exist in
the English language. We just do not want to lose one of those words
for no useful purpose.
"Manifestations of errors" will be given relative priorities, no
matter what you call them. Ones that occur seldom and have little or
no effect will be fairly low priority, and will not cause a program
schedule to slip. Ones that occur often and have little effect might
have to be thought about, since it could affect training ("what is
that little flash on the screen in the upper left corner every so
often?"). Some well-known software company, on the other hand, would
not think twice about this level. Ones that are serious must be fixed
(these that software company might think about :-) ).
So think about the term "bug" being used for any strange effect that
is seen in a program. Yes, the underlying error might be known but
not fixed. And yes, people might be using the term interchangeably
with error. The English language changes, but not generally based on
requests from individuals. :-)
Roger Racine
next prev parent reply other threads:[~1999-12-10 0:00 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 44+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
1999-12-01 0:00 Business Week (12/6/99 issue) article on Software Quality Michael P. Card
1999-12-01 0:00 ` Preben Randhol
1999-12-01 0:00 ` Michael P. Card
1999-12-07 0:00 ` Richard D Riehle
1999-12-08 0:00 ` Ted Dennison
1999-12-08 0:00 ` jim_snead
1999-12-09 0:00 ` John English
1999-12-09 0:00 ` Preben Randhol
1999-12-09 0:00 ` Ted Dennison
1999-12-08 0:00 ` Richard D Riehle
1999-12-09 0:00 ` Ted Dennison
1999-12-09 0:00 ` Richard D Riehle
1999-12-09 0:00 ` Georg Bauhaus
1999-12-10 0:00 ` Preben Randhol
1999-12-08 0:00 ` Robert Dewar
1999-12-08 0:00 ` Richard D Riehle
1999-12-08 0:00 ` Greg Martin
1999-12-08 0:00 ` Keith Thompson
1999-12-08 0:00 ` Richard D Riehle
1999-12-09 0:00 ` Robert Dewar
1999-12-09 0:00 ` Richard D Riehle
1999-12-09 0:00 ` Roger Racine
1999-12-09 0:00 ` Richard D Riehle
1999-12-09 0:00 ` Ray Blaak
1999-12-11 0:00 ` Geoff Bull
1999-12-10 0:00 ` Roger Racine [this message]
1999-12-10 0:00 ` Vladimir Olensky
1999-12-11 0:00 ` Geoff Bull
1999-12-10 0:00 ` Vladimir Olensky
1999-12-09 0:00 ` Jerry Maple
1999-12-10 0:00 ` Vladimir Olensky
1999-12-10 0:00 ` Ted Dennison
1999-12-10 0:00 ` Richard D Riehle
1999-12-14 0:00 ` P.S> Norby
1999-12-11 0:00 ` Jeffrey L Straszheim
1999-12-09 0:00 ` Robert Dewar
1999-12-01 0:00 ` ld
1999-12-01 0:00 ` Michael P. Card
1999-12-02 0:00 ` Preben Randhol
1999-12-02 0:00 ` John Duncan
1999-12-12 0:00 ` Ronald Caudill
1999-12-13 0:00 ` David C. Hoos, Sr.
1999-12-13 0:00 ` Ehud Lamm
1999-12-13 0:00 ` John Duncan
replies disabled
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox