Re: [Gnu-arch-users] more on the merge-fest

[Samium Gromoff]

At Wed, 26 Nov 2003 02:16:57 +0000,
Andrew Suffield wrote:
> 
> [1  <multipart/signed (7bit)>]
> [1.1  <text/plain; us-ascii (quoted-printable)>]
> On Tue, Nov 25, 2003 at 03:39:05PM -0800, Samuel A. Falvo II wrote:
> > > In the absence of this level of redundancy, writing the code and the
> > > test suite in either order will be "good enough for government work."
> > 
> > Actually, no it isn't.  Government work requires that specifications are
> > written up-front, in their entirety, for all projects defined to be
> > "mission critical."
> 
> You have spent too much time looking at the plans and specifications
> for government work and not enough looking at what actually happens in
> the real world.
> 
> Most of the time, the specification is pulled out of the air (to
> satisfy the requirements) and then ignored completely, and bears no
> resemblence to the result.

An excellent point which indicates that nice idea that planning
isn`t too useful in programming.

I tend to think that planning what the code will end up to be doing
is just a rave -- an unrealistic dream about how cool we humans are
at thinking.

Well, i`m assuming an enough long-term projects here, of course.

> -- 
>   .''`.  ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
>  : :' :  http://www.debian.org/ |
>  `. `'                          |
>    `-             -><-          |

regards, Samium Gromoff