https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=128975
--- Comment #2 from b. <newbie...@gmx.de> ---
a fundamental thought ...
sorry, I write long, if errors remain in the program for years one may write
long to work through them clearly.
I think we can continue playing ping-pong for years, 'hurra we fixed the bug' -
'no, there's still something left' - 'we fixed it too' - 'really everything?
... no' ... and so on.
That has three disadvantages:
- it takes an inordinate amount of time,
- it's badly paid,
- the program never or only very late comes to a reliable state,
I don't think neither me nor other users can be the yardstick for the
correctness of a spreadsheet. The complexity we are able to think and control
is far below what is possible in the program. So there will still be errors
that just haven't been discovered yet, and rocket trajectories will be
calculated wrong again and again :-(
three possibilities that would be better?.:
mathematical check of the code ... very complex ...
extensive highly complex test sheets including automated input, saving,
reloading, changes etc. whose results are checked automatically,
possibly easiest: testsheets and scripts that perform all possible calculations
and operations in different versions! of LO and! competing products in
parallel, and automated comparison of the results ...
has anyone ever thought about this?
reg.
b.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.
_______________________________________________
Libreoffice-bugs mailing list
Libreoffice-bugs@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-bugs
