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: 103376,577c9f9c0cdd76d X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public From: Ehud Lamm Subject: Re: Confusing language, was Re: Help help.. please.i am totaly new in ada programing Date: 1999/11/08 Message-ID: #1/1 X-Deja-AN: 546077124 References: <7vqgs2$lcc$1@nnrp1.deja.com> <38233108.F3540F0@ebox.tninet.se> <806716$i6c2@ftp.kvaerner.com> <807109$8m0$1@nnrp1.deja.com> <38270DC7.86553BB1@pwfl.com> Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-Complaints-To: usenet@news.huji.ac.il X-Trace: news.huji.ac.il 942097099 7007 132.64.178.45 (8 Nov 1999 21:38:19 GMT) Organization: The Hebrew University of Jerusalem Mime-Version: 1.0 NNTP-Posting-Date: 8 Nov 1999 21:38:19 GMT Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Date: 1999-11-08T21:38:19+00:00 List-Id: As to the Y2K "bug"/"feature" I am opposed to calling it a bug, myself. But my primary reason is different. The Y2K name covers a wide range behaviours, so calling it a "bug" is simply wrong - these are many systems, with many inputs and many "wrong" behaviours. Maybe a 'class of bugs' maybe better. Now the other issue is that most of these systems, didn't have any defined behavious for these post-Y2K dates - since these wern't part of the specification- in many cases nobadoy thought that the systems will be used that long. Again - maybe a design error - but bug seems like the wrong term. All these are issues that are offtopic for comp.lang.ada. Maybe the testing group will enjoy another thread about this "bug terminology" One issue that is related to general software enginerring, is the issue of reliability. Most Y2K errors, are not of the type where the systems stops nicely and gives a message. They are usually errors that are propoagetd into database, produce wrong results in computations, which are than consisdered correct etc. Now - if the design was correct only for dates upto 31/12/99 - than sanity checks,defenisve programming etc. - MAY have been inorder (I agree with MDC that this can be an engineering tradeof, based on costs, performence etc.). I think many Y2K solutions, simpyl deal with the date fields, and not with the more important issue of reliability. Ehud Lamm mslamm@mscc.huji.ac.il http://purl.oclc.org/NET/ehudlamm <== My home on the web Check it out and subscribe to the E-List- for interesting essays and more!