Re: SlashDot reviews the SPARK book

[Craig Carey <research@ijs.co.nz>]

On 20 May 2004 11:08:34 -0700, snarflemike@yahoo.com (Mike Silva) wrote:

>Mark Lorenzen <mark.lorenzen@ofir.dk> wrote in message news:<m3wu38dud7.fsf@niflheim.malonet>...
>> rod.chapman@praxis-cs.co.uk (Rod Chapman) writes:
...
>> > back in December.  Still...no such thing as bad publicity! :-) [...]
>> >    Rod, SPARK Team
...
>> is no such thing as bad publicity, but it is frustrating to read the
>> comments on the /. message board.
...
>Funny thing is, none of these people actually live their lives that
>way -- deciding that no precautions or advantages are worthwhile,
>since no precaution or advantage can cover every possible situation.
>

SPARK might follow a value for money check. A slashdot posting said that
given that only a small fraction of what it found was a real problem,
SPARK was just required by the contract.

The full entuirely of the comment would be rejected since the man was
a Slashdot 'Anonymous Coward'

Such posters are not given unique numbers by their website's software.

Obviously the anonymous posters could be assigned a unique anonymizing
number that is changed now and then. Though seemingly an extremely
urgent need for Slashdot, no such feature exists. Such would occur if
posting was an expression of a constitional right to a free press and a
right to speech.

Maybe some Ada programmer would send in a bug report.

Craig Carey