--- "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Whether it is "mission critical" has a lot to do
> with the completeness of
> software testing too, Space Shuttle and flight
> computer software where
> people can actually die if there was a fault gets
> far more testing than
> say, digital camera software. Even then software
> bugs can still be found
> on these supposedly fully tested software, example
> include the Grippen
> fighter and F-22 fighter crash when some software
> parameter had the wrong
> sign and the aircraft got into oscillation during
> flight testing.
And let's not forget a NASA contractors error in
failing to convert between English and Metric
measuring scales, which resulted in a Mars mission
scattering itself all over the planet.
>
> I found through managing a number of software
> projects that even with
> "approved test procedure" and "regression testing"
> and "free play testing"
> by our developers, that it really only matters when
> the real users started
> using the software, I am amazed how quickly
> sometimes they manage to break
> a software that has passed all the above mentioned
> tests when it is really
> exercised by the real users.
Yup. You can make software idiot proof, but I don't
think it's possible to make it "user proof." <g>
=====
Bob Meyer
I don't suffer from insanity... I enjoy every minute of it.
_______________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Declare Yourself - Register online to vote today!
http://vote.yahoo.com
*
****
*******
***********************************************************
* For list instructions, including unsubscribe, see:
* http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/eos_list.htm
***********************************************************
