[Ticket#: 2006040510000641] Re: [OT] Articles to read

[Garrett Hylltun]

Richard Gaskin wrote:
> David Burgun wrote:
> 
>> One rule I try to always stick to, is that if there are bugs reported  
>> in a release, however minor, they are fixed before the next major  
>> release is made.
> 
> How many commercial products do you publish, and how large are they (KLOC)?
> 
> Of course we'd all like to aim for zero defects in our work, but in 
> practice if a program is complex enough the developer will have to 
> settle for less than being the only vendor to ship a program of that 
> size bug-free.

[The ideas, opinions and statements made in the following rant are that 
of the author and not of Runtime Revolution Ltd.]

That doesn't make it an acceptable practice at all.  Developers can aim 
for higher standards and produce bug free software.  Excuses are just 
that, *Excuses*.  Just because you don't mind, or accept that in your 
mind that bug free is impossible, doesn't mean that it is impossible, 
only that you've accepted in your mind that it is impossible.

What it comes down to is money.  The need to get the cash flow going as 
quickly as possible.  Make the money now, fix the errors later.  But it 
never happens.  As the money trickles in, the desire to increase that 
trickle to a flow takes precedent over the need to fix the errors. 
Adding more new features becomes a priority in hopes to attract more new 
business, increase revenue, pile more bugs on top of those that already 
exist.  It eventually ends up being a feedback loop and the product 
never becomes exactly what it should be.

Complex or not, a developer has the chance to make it right the first 
time.  If the program is so complex that the developer can't make it 
right, then the developer is working beyond his/her abilities and should 
not take part in that project.  But again, there's the money!

I'm sorry, but my expectations of software is higher.  I get so tired of 
hearing B.S. and excuses as to why software isn't or can't be bug free.

And in my opinion, anyone knowingly releasing software that has bugs in 
it is (add your own explicit comments here).

I can accept bugs that slip by undetected, but once reported or found, 
they should be fixed before the next release, whether that release is an 
update or an upgrade, or in Runtime's case, the update that's actually 
an upgrade.

Yes yes, I've heard the stories before "I've been programming since the 
first abacus was made, hold PHD's in BS and Excuses and it's always been 
like this!"  Blah blah!  And these people make no efforts to improve 
these situations, instead they make excuses because they've been brain 
washed into thinking that this an acceptable practice or the money 
speaks louder to them than doing the job right.

How can someone sleep at night knowing they've release software with 
bugs in it?  Don't you feel guilty about it?

My morals and virtues are not for sale.  If I can't do the job right, 
then I'm not doing the job at all!  In my mind, it would be just like 
fraud, like selling bogus insurance, or claiming that the land you are 
selling is on the lake, only to find that there's a mud puddle in the 
back yard.

Hey, buy this new kick ass car!  It Rocks! (it's got cracks in the 
hoses, a leak in the gas line and the piston rings are totally sub 
standard, and brakes that might lock up at any time, and it's all 
straight from the factory ready for you to take home today)

You know, if the car companies did that, they'd be in court (and have) 
getting their hind ends handed to them!  But it's ok for a software 
developer to release software knowing there's bugs in it.

I sure hope Runtime doesn't make any software for the medical industry, 
or for any Space programs like NASA!  I could just picture the results 
of Runtime made software running a Space Shuttle... BOOM!  But it's 
acceptable of course.  Just couldn't work out that bug in the pressure 
balancing routine.  Oh well, let's add some new features and charge them 
for an upgrade now.

Grrr..... I'd better go take a chill pill and stop ranting here... Sorry 
about that.  I just get so frustrated about this topic.

Don't get me totally wrong here.  I love the language.  Just can't 
accept all the bugs and the price I paid for buying all these bugs. 
Thought I was buying a programming language, not a bug farm.

Probably a good thing that I'm not in politics, they'd probably take me 
out before the elections instead of waiting until I got into office.  ;-)

-Garrett
"Is honor so cheap, or morals so meaningless, as to be sold at the price 
of instability or software riddled with bugs?  Forbid it! almighty 
developers.  I know not what crap others may put up with, but as for 
me... Give me Solid Software or Give me my Money Back!"