in reply to Re^3: Five Common Misconceptions While Learning Perl
in thread Five Common Misconceptions While Learning Perl
Not always, it's not.
Diebold couldn't pitch a viable voting system based on Windows, because they couldn't prove all the failure modes.
Any decently reviewed code will have the same issues: as a minimum, you need to audit all the failure modes for the hardware, OS, and modules, and fix them or deem them acceptable: otherwise, you have code that you MUST not sign off on.
Advocating anything less is advocating lousy software engineering. An engineer MUST NOT sign off on sub-standard work, or he compromises his integrity, and the reputation of his entire profession. You can choose to accept or not accept a given piece component in your system, but only when what it does is well known, audited, and the risks of failure deemed acceptable.
|
---|
Replies are listed 'Best First'. | |
---|---|
Re^5: Five Common Misconceptions While Learning Perl
by revdiablo (Prior) on Dec 02, 2005 at 21:15 UTC |