From: Ted Dennison <dennison@telepath.com>
Subject: Re: Business Week (12/6/99 issue) article on Software Quality
Date: 1999/12/10
Date: 1999-12-10T00:00:00+00:00 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <82r7ao$293$1@nnrp1.deja.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: 82opns$7k2$1@nntp4.atl.mindspring.net
In article <82opns$7k2$1@nntp4.atl.mindspring.net>,
Richard D Riehle <laoXhai@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
> I often hear it used to trivialize the presence of the so-called bug.
If so, its a pretty weak attempt. At this point everyone knows what
"bug" means. If you think the term excuses anything, you don't hang out
in the newsgroups populated mostly by non-programmer software users. The
best word to describe their reception of even minorly buggy software is
"brutal".
> Dennison takes me to task for being a "shrill and crackpot." I hope
> that is not true, but we shrills and crackpots rarely realize it when
> we are correctly identified as such. My point of view is simply that
I did *not* call you that. I simply said that those are the two types of
people who gravitate to the "we must change the word, and the meaing
will somehow change too" arguments. I definitely don't deem you a
crackpot, and you have about two more threads of this to go before you
achieve full shrill-hood. (A state which I'm sure I have achieved on
certian issues).
> >Personally I think Juliet had it right, and to paraphrase
> >
> >"a bug by any other name would stink as bad"
>
> Again with the poetry. :-) I love poetry, as you know, Robert.
> I have been trying, as I compose this, to think of a counter-quote
> from Shakespeare -- there must be one -- but it does not come to
Just make something up. It couldn't be much looser of a parahprase than
Robert's. :-)
How about:
Alas, poor bug! I knew him, Horatio: a fellow
of infinite jest, of most excellent fancy: he hath
borne me on his back a thousand times; and now, how
abhorred in my imagination it is! my gorge rims at
it.
--
T.E.D.
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
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 ` ld
1999-12-01 0:00 ` Michael P. Card
1999-12-02 0:00 ` Preben Randhol
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 ` 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
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 [this message]
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
1999-12-08 0:00 ` Ted Dennison
1999-12-08 0:00 ` Richard D Riehle
1999-12-09 0:00 ` Georg Bauhaus
1999-12-10 0:00 ` Preben Randhol
1999-12-09 0:00 ` Ted Dennison
1999-12-09 0:00 ` Richard D Riehle
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
1999-12-02 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