Bad advice on confirming the existence of bugs.

[Mike Samuel]

On Aug 4, 2016 11:57 AM, "Mark S. Miller" <erights at google.com> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Jul 27, 2016 at 10:20 AM, Alex Vincent <ajvincent at gmail.com>
quoted:
>>
>>
>> --
>> "The first step in confirming there is a bug in someone else's work is
confirming there are no bugs in your own."
>> -- Alexander J. Vincent, June 30, 2001
>
>
>
> I rarely comment on these incidental aphorisms, but this one is so wrong
that it is worth pointing out. You can confirm the existence of many bugs
by
>   * demonstration via failing test case,
>   * finding the bug,
>   * having a plausible explanation for why it is incorrect,
>   * writing a fix with a plausible explanation for why it fixes the
problem, and
>   * demonstrating that the fix repairs the demonstrated test case.
>
> However hard this is, it is vastly easier than confirming that there are
no bugs in your own code.

The latter requires a closed definition of "bug," but the former can be
done using an open definition.

> --
>     Cheers,
>     --MarkM
>
> _______________________________________________
> es-discuss mailing list
> es-discuss at mozilla.org
> https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.mozilla.org/pipermail/es-discuss/attachments/20160804/63edb370/attachment.html>