|
Goes hand in hand with maintainable.
Tim Smith
I'm going to patent thought. I have yet to see any prior art.
|
|
|
|
|
I disagree.
Bug free != efficient, fast or easy to maintain. Sure, you can put those attributes in the requirments doc, but if they aren't satisfied are they bugs or merely unimplemented features?
cheers,
Chris Maunder
Remember that a lone amateur built the Ark. A large group of professionals built the Titanic.
|
|
|
|
|
I'll weasel a little here based on wording. I was interpreting the phrase 'bug-free' as being equivalent to 'defect-free'. In the corporate culture where I work[^], defect-free encompasses extensibility, maintainability, understandability, performance, and resource efficiency.
An application that doesn't meet at least 'acceptable' levels in all of these areas will fail to meet the end user's requirements or expectations in some way. For our production-oriented customers (a surly lot), failing to meet their needs/wants/vulgar fantasies is Not A Good Thing.
Software Zen: delete this;
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
