Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]


Groups > comp.programming > #6838

Re: To hell with the program spec - I know what's best

From Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk>
Newsgroups comp.programming
Subject Re: To hell with the program spec - I know what's best
Date 2016-07-27 08:10 +0100
Organization Origin Sonata
Message-ID <nn9mps$69j$1@dont-email.me> (permalink)
References <nn6vmo$lh0$1@dont-email.me> <exam-20160726112224@ram.dialup.fu-berlin.de> <MPG.3201e5fd52ec5da798a3cc@news.eternal-september.org>

Show all headers | View raw


On 27/07/16 03:26, J. Clarke wrote:
> In article <exam-20160726112224@ram.dialup.fu-berlin.de>, ram@zedat.fu-
> berlin.de says...
>>
>> Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> writes:
>>> The trouble with not sticking to the spec is that you don't meet the
>>> clients' expectations, and it's the client that pays the bills. If you
>>> don't do what is asked, the client may well be in a position to refuse
>>> to pay for the work. The same applies to anything you did do that was
>>> /not/ asked for.
>>
>>    Or worse, when you are taking an exam, and the requirement is
>>    to write a program that prints »hello, world«, and you turn in
>>    a program that prints »C programming«, you might get worse grades!
>>
>>    What grade should a student deserve when the requirement is to
>>    write a program that prints »hello, world«, and his program
>>    prints »Hello world!«?
>
> What grade would one get if in addition to the program that prints
> "hello, world", the student provided an installation program, an
> uninstallation program, and a set of bound documentation clearly
> describing the use of both the "hello, world" program and the
> installer/uninstaller?

The grade should be D- (and for very good reason).

> That's the kind of "deviation from spec" that we're talking about,
> however Heathfield doesn't seem to understand the difference between
> that and providing a broken program.

Mr Clarke, you seem to think that you have sole charge of the client's 
cheque book.

The creation of software takes time, effort, and money. The money has to 
come from somewhere, and (from the software developer's perspective at 
least) it comes from the client. And I realise it's a tricky concept, 
but it's true: He who pays the piper calls the tune.

If the client wants an installer/uninstaller, he'll ask for it. Since he 
didn't ask for it, he sure as hell isn't liable to pay for it. If you 
charge him for it anyway, he has the right to refuse. If it went to 
court, he'd win.

If, however, the "hello, world" student were to add a comment to his 
answer to the effect that he could on request provide an 
installer/uninstaller and that it would take no more than H hours and 
cost no more than P pounds, then he would receive full credit for that 
worthy answer.

Now please stop being such an ass. It is perfectly possible for two 
people who disagree to have a /civil/ conversation. Why not give it a try?

-- 
Richard Heathfield
Email: rjh at cpax dot org dot uk
"Usenet is a strange place" - dmr 29 July 1999
Sig line 4 vacant - apply within

Back to comp.programming | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread


Thread

To hell with the program spec - I know what's best Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2016-07-26 07:24 +0100
  Re: To hell with the program spec - I know what's best Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2016-07-26 13:42 +0100
    Re: To hell with the program spec - I know what's best Ike Naar <ike@iceland.freeshell.org> - 2016-07-26 13:23 +0000
      Re: To hell with the program spec - I know what's best Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2016-07-26 14:51 +0100
        Re: To hell with the program spec - I know what's best "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-07-26 22:29 -0400
    Re: To hell with the program spec - I know what's best David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2016-07-26 16:53 +0200
  Re: To hell with the program spec - I know what's best Julio Di Egidio <julio@diegidio.name> - 2016-07-26 06:29 -0700
  Re: To hell with the program spec - I know what's best David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2016-07-26 15:41 +0200
    Re: To hell with the program spec - I know what's best Julio Di Egidio <julio@diegidio.name> - 2016-07-26 10:08 -0700
  Re: To hell with the program spec - I know what's best "Ant" <not@home.today> - 2016-07-26 19:50 +0100
    Re: To hell with the program spec - I know what's best "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2016-07-26 14:32 -0500
  Re: To hell with the program spec - I know what's best "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-07-26 22:26 -0400
    Re: To hell with the program spec - I know what's best Kaz Kylheku <349-534-5780@kylheku.com> - 2016-07-27 03:57 +0000
      Re: To hell with the program spec - I know what's best Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2016-07-27 08:21 +0100
        Re: To hell with the program spec - I know what's best "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-07-28 06:43 -0400
          Re: To hell with the program spec - I know what's best Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2016-07-28 12:12 +0100
      Re: To hell with the program spec - I know what's best "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-07-28 06:40 -0400
    Re: To hell with the program spec - I know what's best Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2016-07-27 08:10 +0100
      Re: To hell with the program spec - I know what's best BartC <bc@freeuk.com> - 2016-07-27 11:04 +0100
        Re: To hell with the program spec - I know what's best Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2016-07-27 14:05 +0100
          Re: To hell with the program spec - I know what's best BartC <bc@freeuk.com> - 2016-07-27 18:21 +0100
            Re: To hell with the program spec - I know what's best Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2016-07-27 18:56 +0100
          Re: To hell with the program spec - I know what's best "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-07-28 06:51 -0400
            Re: To hell with the program spec - I know what's best Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2016-07-28 12:26 +0100
        Re: To hell with the program spec - I know what's best Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> - 2016-07-27 19:51 -0400
          Re: To hell with the program spec - I know what's best "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2016-07-27 22:37 -0500
            Re: To hell with the program spec - I know what's best Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2016-07-28 07:28 +0100
              Re: To hell with the program spec - I know what's best "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-07-28 06:54 -0400
            Re: To hell with the program spec - I know what's best "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-07-28 06:53 -0400
              Re: To hell with the program spec - I know what's best Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> - 2016-07-28 08:38 -0400
      Re: To hell with the program spec - I know what's best Öö Tiib <ootiib@hot.ee> - 2016-07-27 05:52 -0700
      Re: To hell with the program spec - I know what's best "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-07-28 06:48 -0400
        Re: To hell with the program spec - I know what's best Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2016-07-28 12:21 +0100
          Re: To hell with the program spec - I know what's best Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> - 2016-07-28 08:47 -0400
            Re: To hell with the program spec - I know what's best Randy Howard <rhoward.mx@EverybodyUsesIt.com> - 2016-07-28 16:13 -0500
              Re: To hell with the program spec - I know what's best Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2016-07-28 22:38 +0100

csiph-web