In
<of1f97a172.f079794d-on48257e22.001a26e3-48257e22.001dd...@sg.ibm.com>,
on 04/09/2015
at 01:26 PM, Timothy Sipples <[email protected]> said:
>How do YOU know it's "even more expensive"?
How do I know that yopu exist?
>You haven't articulated an inviolable physical constant, like some
>theories in physics.
Theories in Physics are provisional; evidence trumps theory.m
>This issue is situational,
Part of the stipulated situation is a regulation with stiff penalties.
>"wait for 100% bug free, fully performance optimized code"
Are we having a sale on straw dummies? The issue isn't whether to wait
forr 100% correct, but whether to do thorough testing before rolling
code into production.
>That doesn't mean operators trying to say "No" to everything "new"
>is helpful.
Neither inventing positions that nobody took.
>Even when I seem to be the only rational voice in the room. :-)
Responding to imaginary posts isn't rational. Why not address what
people actually wrote?
--
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg and JOAT
ISO position; see <http://patriot.net/~shmuel/resume/brief.html>
We don't care. We don't have to care, we're Congress.
(S877: The Shut up and Eat Your spam act of 2003)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
