I didn't assert that it was the point.

Thanks for the reference.
On 24 Nov 2014 17:51, "Aron Ahmadia" <[email protected]> wrote:

>   From McConnell's summary in Code Complete:
>
>  > Industry average experience is about 1-25 errors per 1000 lines of code
> for delivered software.
>
>  Of course, that's production code that has presumably been through far
> more testing and other forms of quality assurance than scientific code.
> The 95% number is just an assumption for an example, not a precise
> citation.  Greg may know of a better number for scientific code, but I
> don't think that's really the point of the exercise.
>
> On Mon, Nov 24, 2014 at 12:44 PM, Shoaib Sufi <
> [email protected]> wrote:
>
>> Hi Aron,
>>
>> What I mean is where does the assumption of a line of code being 95%
>> correct come from.
>>
>> Thank you for helping me think more clearly about the question I wanted
>> to ask.
>>
>> Best
>> Shoaib
>>
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Nov 24, 2014 at 5:38 PM, Aron Ahmadia <[email protected]> wrote:
>> > It's a function of statistics, assuming each of the lines of code is an
>> > independent distribution that is either correct or wrong.
>> >
>> > Given the input assumption (95% of all source code lines are correct as
>> > written the first time), then the code is correct if the individual
>> lines
>> > are all correct, which has probability P = 0.95^17.  This is more
>> correctly
>> > rounded to 42%, but it's in the right ballpark :)
>> >
>> > On Mon, Nov 24, 2014 at 12:34 PM, Shoaib Sufi <
>> [email protected]>
>> > wrote:
>> >>
>>  >> Hi,
>> >>
>> >> At the bottom of:
>> >>
>> >>
>> https://github.com/swcarpentry/bc/blob/gh-pages/novice/r/04-cond-colors-R.Rmd
>> >>
>> >> It states:
>> >>
>> >> 'Our final heatmap function is 17 lines long, which means that if
>> >> there's a 95% chance of each line being correct, the odds of the whole
>> >> function being right are only 41%. Before we go any further, we need
>> >> to learn how to test whether our code is doing what we want it to do,
>> >> and that will be the subject of the next lesson.'
>> >>
>> >> Where is the reference for making a statement like that - i.e. %
>> >> chance of errors based on function length.
>> >>
>> >> Thanks
>> >> Shoaib Sufi
>> >>
>> >> _______________________________________________
>> >> Discuss mailing list
>> >> [email protected]
>> >>
>> >>
>> http://lists.software-carpentry.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss_lists.software-carpentry.org
>> >
>> >
>>
>
>
_______________________________________________
Discuss mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.software-carpentry.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss_lists.software-carpentry.org

Reply via email to