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=-1.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: fac41,a48e5b99425d742a X-Google-Attributes: gidfac41,public X-Google-Thread: 103376,a48e5b99425d742a X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-Thread: f43e6,a48e5b99425d742a X-Google-Attributes: gidf43e6,public X-Google-Thread: 1108a1,5da92b52f6784b63 X-Google-Attributes: gid1108a1,public From: jezequel@irisa.fr (Jean-Marc Jezequel) Subject: Re: Please do not start a language war (was Re: Papers on the Ariane-5 crash and Design by Contract Date: 1997/03/21 Message-ID: <5gue93$2md$3@news.irisa.fr>#1/1 X-Deja-AN: 227309429 Distribution: world References: <332B5495.167EB0E7@eiffel.com> <5giu3p$beb$1@news.irisa.fr> <332ED8AB.21E7@lmtas.lmco.com> <5go8nk$ngf$1@news.irisa.fr> <3332C049.2A0F@lmtas.lmco.com> Organization: Irisa, Rennes (FR) Newsgroups: comp.lang.eiffel,comp.object,comp.software-eng,comp.lang.ada Date: 1997-03-21T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: In article <3332C049.2A0F@lmtas.lmco.com>, Ken Garlington writes: >"It should be noted that for reasons of physical law, it is not >feasible to test the SRI as a "black box" in the flight environment, >unless one makes a completely realistic flight test, but it is possible OK, it seems that some people refuse to get the point of our paper (design by contract is need when you attempt to reuse "black-boxes"). It is their pure right. I would be a pity if it would degenerate into a flame bait. So I won't continue to argue... >to do ground testing by injecting simulated accelerometric signals in >accordance with predicted flight parameters, while also using a >turntable to simulate launcher angular movements. Had such a test been performed That is, opening the black box... >the supplier or as part of the acceptance test, the failure mechanism >would have been exposed." >As someone who, today, is performing testing of coupled IRS and flight >control systems in a ground-based environment, I am quite confident in >the conclusions of the paper on this point. I understand that you feel touchy on the subject since it is your job that is at stake. But you do not need to worry: our point was not that test is not necessary: it is! But it is not sufficient (I expect that you would agree on that). Also, testing is a part of V&V, which is itself a part of the larger goal of making a project succesful (whatever be the meaning of that). -- Jean-Marc Jezequel Tel : +33 2 99847192 IRISA/CNRS Fax : +33 2 99847171 Campus de Beaulieu e-mail : jezequel@irisa.fr F-35042 RENNES (FRANCE) http://www.irisa.fr/pampa/PROF/jmj.html