Re: Continue with learning C

From	James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net>
Newsgroups	comp.lang.c
Subject	Re: Continue with learning C
Date	2016-09-19 09:49 -0400
Organization	A noiseless patient Spider
Message-ID	<nroqce$nu3$1@dont-email.me> (permalink)
References	(3 earlier) <nrf0r3$ud8$1@dont-email.me> <ba6477d8-59a2-4a24-8b52-49a52c0c4691@googlegroups.com> <nrkd4e$f1q$1@dont-email.me> <bbd95f72-0de5-531c-f401-991ae91ce4c6@verizon.net> <d2d7c674-a1ae-40ab-b6df-80f0a0fd4e9f@googlegroups.com>

Show all headers | View raw

On 09/19/2016 04:25 AM, Alla _ wrote:
> On Sunday, September 18, 2016 at 1:14:58 AM UTC+3, James R. Kuyper wrote:
>> On 09/17/2016 05:38 PM, Richard Heathfield wrote:
>>> On 17/09/16 05:02, Malcolm McLean wrote:
>>>> On Thursday, September 15, 2016 at 9:38:10 PM UTC+1, Richard Heathfield wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> If experienced people are constantly telling you you're going too fast
>>>>> and you keep going faster, eventually they'll give up trying to advise
>>>>> you. By all means go as fast as you can, but not any faster. That way
>>>>> lies slapdash make-do-and-mend programming.
>>>>>
>>>> Depends. You can normally sell software with a few bugs in it.
>>>
>>> Don't you find that to be rather embarrassing?
>>
>> If there was any significant amount of software being sold that was 
>> entirely bug-free, I'd be embarrassed.
> I wonder why is that so? Why are bugs staying in final drafts? If, for example,
> you print a school textbook on grammar with typos in it, I'll think that it's 
> defective and not suitable for sale/use. Why all programs contain bugs? 
> Isn't it an indication of a poor quality? Can one allow himself a defect in,
> say, building an apartment building, or in building a nuclear factory? 

I suspect that most published books contain at least one typo.
Electronic submission of text and automated spell-checkers have reduced
the number of errors, but have not eliminated them. A key difference
between software and a textbooks is that a single error in the actual
code will generally cause some malfunction, whereas people read text
with fault-tolerant processing - they might not even notice the typo
(which is why they are so hard to detect), and if they do notice it,
they'll often make a reasonable (and hopefully, correct) guess about
what was intended, and go on without bothering to complain to the
publisher about it.

Have you ever bought a house? I bought a brand-new house from a
reputable builder three years ago. We walked through the house twice
during construction, and once again just before signing the papers. We
hired a professional inspector to join us for the first and last walk
through. We had a home warranty that covered most of the items in the
house for 1 full year, and some items for two. We did further
inspections a few months before the 1 year mark, and again before the 2
year deadline. These inspections were all recommended by the builder's
own guide for buyers. We found several minor problems in every case;
which they generally fixed promptly. This is completely normal for new
home construction, all the guides for new home buyers emphasize the
importance of inspecting the home before and after purchasing it, and
the fact that you don't need to panic just because you find something
during the inspection.

For an apartment building, multiply that by the number of units in the
building. For a nuclear factory (do you mean a nuclear power plant, or
perhaps a uranium enrichment facility?), there's probably a LOT more
inspections before the facility starts operation, and many additional
ones at regular intervals afterwards for as long as it's operating, and
less frequently after it's been shutdown but still radioactive. I
suspect that most of those inspections turn up at least one minor
problem that needs to be addressed.

You may be unaware of this, but virtually every major construction
project has taken the lives of at least one of the construction workers.

In some ways, software is much harder to make error-free than many other
products. A key reason is that every program is a new design; if it
wasn't a new design, there would have been no need to write it, since
you could use an existing program instead. A wise programmer seldom
writes code serving the same purpose twice, and even less often does it
three times - they abstract the repeating part into a separate
sub-routine or macro  or header file and re-use it. Since each program
is new, previous experience isn't as helpful as it can be in other
professions.

Thread

Continue with learning C Alla _ <modelling.data@gmail.com> - 2016-09-15 05:11 -0700
  Re: Continue with learning C "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2016-09-15 05:29 -0700
  Re: Continue with learning C Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2016-09-15 15:01 +0100
  Re: Continue with learning C Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2016-09-15 15:32 +0100
    Re: Continue with learning C Alla _ <modelling.data@gmail.com> - 2016-09-15 08:10 -0700
    Re: Continue with learning C luser droog <luser.droog@gmail.com> - 2016-09-15 12:06 -0700
      Re: Continue with learning C Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2016-09-15 21:38 +0100
        Re: Continue with learning C Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2016-09-16 21:02 -0700
          Re: Continue with learning C "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2016-09-17 08:03 -0500
          Re: Continue with learning C Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2016-09-17 22:38 +0100
            Re: Continue with learning C "James R. Kuyper" <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2016-09-17 18:14 -0400
              Re: Continue with learning C raltbos@xs4all.nl (Richard Bos) - 2016-09-18 10:47 +0000
              Re: Continue with learning C Alla _ <modelling.data@gmail.com> - 2016-09-19 01:25 -0700
                Re: Continue with learning C Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2016-09-19 20:51 +1200
                Re: Continue with learning C James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2016-09-19 09:49 -0400
                Re: Continue with learning C Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2016-09-19 15:15 +0100
                Re: Continue with learning C Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2016-09-19 11:39 -0700
                Re: Continue with learning C Reinhardt Behm <rbehm@hushmail.com> - 2016-09-20 09:55 +0800
                Re: Continue with learning C David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2016-09-20 08:50 +0200
                Re: Continue with learning C Reinhardt Behm <rbehm@hushmail.com> - 2016-09-20 18:04 +0800
                Re: Continue with learning C David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2016-09-20 13:25 +0200
                Re: Continue with learning C Reinhardt Behm <rbehm@hushmail.com> - 2016-09-20 20:18 +0800
                Re: Continue with learning C David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2016-09-20 15:25 +0200
                Re: Continue with learning C Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2016-09-20 08:45 -0400
                Re: Continue with learning C Reinhardt Behm <rbehm@hushmail.com> - 2016-09-20 22:05 +0800
                Re: Continue with learning C Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2016-09-20 10:56 -0400
                Re: Continue with learning C Rosario19 <Ros@invalid.invalid> - 2016-09-19 18:55 +0200
                Re: Continue with learning C Anton Shepelev <anton.txt@gmail.com> - 2016-09-25 01:08 +0300
            Re: Continue with learning C Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2016-09-17 17:08 -0700
              Re: Continue with learning C Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2016-09-18 01:11 +0100
                Re: Continue with learning C Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2016-09-17 21:32 -0400
                Re: Continue with learning C David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2016-09-18 16:27 +0200
                Re: Continue with learning C Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2016-09-18 16:08 -0400
                Re: Continue with learning C Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2016-09-18 07:30 -0700
                Re: Continue with learning C Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2016-09-18 16:07 -0400
                Re: Continue with learning C David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2016-09-18 16:38 +0200
                Re: Continue with learning C BartC <bc@freeuk.com> - 2016-09-18 16:37 +0100
                Re: Continue with learning C Reinhardt Behm <rbehm@hushmail.com> - 2016-09-18 23:54 +0800
                Re: Continue with learning C Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2016-09-18 16:56 -0700
                Re: Continue with learning C Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2016-09-18 17:05 +0100
                Re: Continue with learning C "James R. Kuyper" <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2016-09-18 12:28 -0400
                Re: Continue with learning C Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2016-09-18 17:00 -0700
                Re: Continue with learning C Alla _ <modelling.data@gmail.com> - 2016-09-19 01:40 -0700
                Re: Continue with learning C "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2016-09-19 08:55 -0500
                Re: Continue with learning C "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2016-09-18 11:31 -0500
                Re: Continue with learning C Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2016-09-19 07:25 +1200
                Re: Continue with learning C Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2016-09-18 20:36 +0100
                Re: Continue with learning C "James R. Kuyper" <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2016-09-18 15:45 -0400
                Re: Continue with learning C Rosario19 <Ros@invalid.invalid> - 2016-09-19 18:58 +0200
                Re: Continue with learning C "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2016-09-18 09:55 -0700
                Re: Continue with learning C "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2016-09-18 10:12 -0700
                Re: Continue with learning C luser droog <luser.droog@gmail.com> - 2016-09-18 13:11 -0700
                Re: Continue with learning C David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2016-09-18 21:54 +0200
                Re: Continue with learning C supercat@casperkitty.com - 2016-09-18 15:58 -0700
                Re: Continue with learning C Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2016-09-19 07:09 +0100
                Re: Continue with learning C David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2016-09-19 10:04 +0200
                Re: Continue with learning C BartC <bc@freeuk.com> - 2016-09-19 10:38 +0100
                Re: Continue with learning C David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2016-09-19 13:29 +0200
                Re: Continue with learning C supercat@casperkitty.com - 2016-09-19 08:04 -0700
                Re: Continue with learning C Reinhardt Behm <rbehm@hushmail.com> - 2016-09-20 09:33 +0800
                Re: Continue with learning C supercat@casperkitty.com - 2016-09-19 20:47 -0700
                Re: Continue with learning C David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2016-09-20 09:00 +0200
                Re: Continue with learning C Reinhardt Behm <rbehm@hushmail.com> - 2016-09-20 17:59 +0800
                Re: Continue with learning C Ike Naar <ike@iceland.freeshell.org> - 2016-09-20 17:24 +0000
                Re: Continue with learning C David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2016-09-20 08:57 +0200
                Re: Continue with learning C supercat@casperkitty.com - 2016-09-20 10:53 -0700
                Re: Continue with learning C Reinhardt Behm <rbehm@hushmail.com> - 2016-09-19 13:19 +0800
                Re: Continue with learning C Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2016-09-19 01:30 +0100
      Re: Continue with learning C Alla _ <modelling.data@gmail.com> - 2016-09-19 01:15 -0700
  Re: Continue with learning C Barry Schwarz <schwarzb@dqel.com> - 2016-09-15 12:38 -0700
  Re: Continue with learning C fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2016-09-21 11:42 -0700
    Re: Continue with learning C fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2016-09-21 12:40 -0700
      Re: Continue with learning C fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2016-09-21 12:49 -0700
      Re: Continue with learning C fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2016-09-23 14:47 -0700
        Re: Continue with learning C fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2016-09-23 14:59 -0700

csiph-web