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=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham
	autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 107f24,582dff0b3f065a52
X-Google-Attributes: gid107f24,public
X-Google-Thread: 109fba,582dff0b3f065a52
X-Google-Attributes: gid109fba,public
X-Google-Thread: 103376,bc1361a952ec75ca
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
X-Google-Thread: 1014db,582dff0b3f065a52
X-Google-Attributes: gid1014db,public
X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2001-08-03 04:55:01 PST
Path: 
 archiver1.google.com!newsfeed.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!skynet.be!newsgate.cistron.nl!news.worldonline.nl!newsclients!news.worldonline.nl!not-for-mail
From: info@hoekstra-uitgeverij.nl (Richard Bos)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada,comp.lang.c,comp.lang.c++,comp.lang.functional
Subject: Re: How Ada could have prevented the Red Code distributed denial of
 service attack.
Date: Fri, 03 Aug 2001 11:24:54 GMT
Organization: Go wash your mouth.
Message-ID: <3b6a4414.1193645865@news.worldonline.nl>
References: <bebbba07.0107292308.d1192fc@posting.google.com>
 <$Id63yuv4BjB@eisner.encompasserve.org>
 <3b6903f5.1111682555@news.worldonline.nl> <9kci3p$ri$1@elf.eng.bsdi.com>
 <9kdeuv$dfh@augusta.math.psu.edu>
NNTP-Posting-Host: vp228-108.worldonline.nl
X-Trace: nereid.worldonline.nl 996839596 26768 195.241.228.108 (3 Aug 2001
 11:53:16 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: newsmaster@worldonline.nl
NNTP-Posting-Date: 3 Aug 2001 11:53:16 GMT
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.21/32.243
Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:11189 comp.lang.c:71874
 comp.lang.c++:79624 comp.lang.functional:7251
Date: 2001-08-03T11:53:16+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

cross@augusta.math.psu.edu (Dan Cross) wrote:

> In article <9kci3p$ri$1@elf.eng.bsdi.com>, Chris Torek  <torek@BSDI.COM> wrote:
> >Others may use the terminology differently (e.g., interchangeably),
> >but I like this distinction -- it is like the one between tactics
> >and strategy.
> 
> IMHO, the use of the term ``bug'' to describe an error in a piece of
> software is a cop-out on the part of software engineers and
> programmers.  The term ``bug'' implies that it's beyond the control of
> the programmer,

Says who? When I write a bug, it's _my_ bug.

<sarcasm>
Of course, when you use a language that will prevent you from making
mistakes, any bugs in the software could not possibly be yours.
</sarcasm>

That's why I check and test my programs before using them for production
work. With "modern" programmers, that's becoming an ever rarer
procedure, alas.

Richard