>>>> I especially like the claims of "every time we added debug code, the 
>>>> bug went away". Surely it is impossible to work under such 
>>>> conditions...
>>>
>>> Well, I tell you that's pure reality.
>>
>>> Yeah, it's kind of fun developing software for devices where 
>>> occasionally the only way to get any helpful debug information out of 
>>> the thing is by switching an LED on or off, and errors might just as 
>>> well be hardware-related.
>>
>> Wouldn't this make it scientifically impossible to deliver a working 
>> product?
> 
> I'm not sure what you mean by this.
> 
> If you're saying, "wouldn't this make it impossible to prove that the 
> product is working properly", then yes: Such a proof is impossible for 
> virtually /every/ real-life product. Welcome to real-world software (and 
> hardware) development.
> 
> If you're saying, "if you can't get any debug information out of the 
> device except for an LED, how can the product be of use anyway?", then 
> you're missing the fact that there might be other interfaces to the 
> outside world, which just happen to be unavailable for debugging 
> information (e.g. they're not initialized yet when the error occurs, or 
> the interface protocol provides no means to introduce any "side channel").

No, what I'm saying is "if adding debug code alters all the bugs, how 
does that not make it scientifically impossible to remove all the bugs?"

Post a reply to this message