On Wed, 2 Dec 2009, Matteo Sisti Sette wrote:
The greatest frustration is when you carefully design something so that size
(e.g. number of instances) shouldn't be a problem, you strongly test it
within a certain 'size' and verify it is rock-solid, and then, when you have
everything working and your project grows a little bit and you just add a
couple more instances of something, it stasrts crashing....
[...]
In some cases some developer (I won't tell the name, but it's someone
very important here) was able to find specific bugs and fixed it and
published a new release.
I think it's more constructive to say who fixed bugs, even if it's someone
who wrote the bugs in the first place. We shouldn't have a culture in
which bugs are that much shameful, because it steepens a few learning
curves, it raises the entry level, and it causes finished externals to
stay sitting on their author's hard disk just because it's too long to
review it to ensure it contains no potentially embarrassing mistakes...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:CatalysisScheme.png
complex, scalable design; but the implementation doesn't support it at
the end. Also, these kind of bugs are very difficult to isolate.
It's hard to do anything about this unless we are talking about specific
cases. I'd rather have you point at specific bugs than making general
claims.
_ _ __ ___ _____ ________ _____________ _____________________ ...
| Mathieu Bouchard, Montréal, Québec. téléphone: +1.514.383.3801
_______________________________________________
Pd-list@iem.at mailing list
UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management ->
http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
