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, MSGID_RANDY autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,e4b2dce209393666 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public From: Ted Dennison Subject: Re: Business Week (12/6/99 issue) article on Software Quality Date: 1999/12/08 Message-ID: <82lv4i$aso$1@nnrp1.deja.com>#1/1 X-Deja-AN: 557986974 References: <82hk54$cbc$1@nntp6.atl.mindspring.net> X-Http-Proxy: 1.0 x32.deja.com:80 (Squid/1.1.22) for client 204.48.27.130 Organization: Deja.com - Before you buy. X-Article-Creation-Date: Wed Dec 08 15:57:08 1999 GMT X-MyDeja-Info: XMYDJUIDtedennison Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada X-Http-User-Agent: Mozilla/4.6 [en] (WinNT; I) Date: 1999-12-08T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: In article <82hk54$cbc$1@nntp6.atl.mindspring.net>, Richard D Riehle wrote: > I have sent the following letter to the editor at Business Week. > > -- ================================================================= > > Software development is the only engineering wannabee that euphemizes > its mistakes with the cutsey monicker, "bug." The IEEE has suggested > a three level designation starting with "mistake/error", that produces > a software As a reader, you loose me right here. This kind of lingusitc revisionism has throughout history been the exclusive domain of shrills and crackpots. There is ample proof that changing the word used to describe something has absolutely no impact on the meaning people give the concept. To make matters worse, the "improved" term is invariably longer and more mushy-mouthed. -- T.E.D. Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/ Before you buy.