-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On 09.07.2014 03:00, Thomas Dullien wrote: > Nobody is saying you can't write checkable code. All I am saying > that for most / all of our legacy code, making it checkable is > equivalent to rewriting it.
Nice theory, but do you have any evidence? Furthermore: What is the definition of legacy code, and what is the definition of rewritten/new code? If the definition of "legacy code" is: legacy code == not checkable code you have won, but I guess that would be a catch 22. kind regards Sven -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (MingW32) iQGcBAEBAgAGBQJTvW1NAAoJEAq0kGAWDrqlqFkL/1B16L6O8EB2Z+1LdnLUBnRg 5va43169YjWO7GpQo5TdnxZYO1fZb3mq1paTmMGxsEWBeAD/q4g6pw3U7H1AowZQ PzrLpsDdbRBHd77NGYaDXmQlWiE+ZJqMiwxQM8dtmI7GktAmXWPj1+UX9rQC7Rdw IOJhyM7aMTqx2V20ueJXJZecW6fyOBIIkfK5akNJxdBZkrPeUATnffSzbLPz56EK nfC46sw5YyAzHLoEj2btbTqqA1yvI84Y+SKeO5Q2DaNI0SMfkANqpv0pwcQY8WpF aw6lL4da5MGevmSfvvDdCS2v6X/I6qVOGSsAJSwaZ/xqDmCVyISBGTf/bxGEF8aj YjhuEGJrlzW8RskqhBi/hljSXI06GWJrfXAABCC5NpUVhLqAQZP7vYDyCT+oquKq wpYHXxSfVa88gJAoXs+WNIIzchvRMatpuLjI4024YcIBc2lQ2BwIOvt+g4adgVOV xiDMu0lUqwzEFtxNgDsuDKWIOk+JekIUCwLoaoyx+g== =L0RQ -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- _______________________________________________ langsec-discuss mailing list langsec-discuss@mail.langsec.org https://mail.langsec.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/langsec-discuss
