topmind wrote:
> After thousands of debates and failed attempts to find objective
> metrics beyond execution speed and matching stated external
> requirements, I am leaning toward the "art" viewpoint. One man's
> spehgetti code is another man's masterpeice. Just because I find it a
> flaming tangled mess does not mean the next guy will. Related:
>
> http://www.geocities.com/tablizer/science.htm
>
Ye gods. I'll limit my response to that to a comment on the metrics.
How about "correctness" ? Or, "provability" ? Or, "ability to reason
about what this software actually does, without resorting to stuffing
some more-or-less random test cases through it as some kind of
demonstration that it kind-of, maybe, perhaps does what we want it to,
for these semi-random test cases at least ?"
Received on Sat Jul 08 2006 - 18:04:49 CDT
