quasi wrote:
> On Sun, 27 Jan 2008 17:19:12 GMT, rjf <fateman@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>
>> Vladimir Bondarenko wrote:
>>> ----------------------------------------------------------------
>>>
>>> Our little demo continues..... Hello again from the VM machine
>>> which hopefully soon will not be ignored by CAS manufacturers.
>>>
>>> ----------------------------------------------------------------
>>>
>>> N[Integrate[Sin[z] BesselJ[1, z]/Sqrt[z + z^2], {z,0,Infinity}]]
>>>
>>> 0.800192
>> This little demonstration illustrates how NOT to do re****ting of a bug.
.... [good stuff snipped]
>
> I disagree.
>
> A bug is a reproducible erroneous output.
>
> No need to debug it.
>
> No need to find an explanation.
>
> The users who find the bug are the _customers_, not the employees.
> Simply re****t it and let the CAS vendor's sup****t people take it from
> there.
But here's the rub.
If you or I or any other random user finds a bug, we can say "I'm just
a paying user -- the devs should ferret out the cause so I can get
back to doing what I paid for."
VB claims to be more than that -- he claims to be a #1 tester of CAS
software. Such a person is expected to not only find bugs, but submit
quality bug re****ts. But he rarely does that; his re****ts are
generally "ooh look; this didn't work as I expected" with little or no
analysis. And sometimes they show his expectations to be out of line
with reality (e.g. floating-point problems are here to stay).
There's a normative difference in the source of these bug re****ts.
- Daniel
|
