C Community's Cavalier Attitude On Software Reliability

[Chris Lang]

In article <8212 at hubcap.clemson.edu> billwolf%hazel.cs.clemson.edu at hubcap.clemson.edu writes:
>   Under no circumstances should a DEFECTS section contain flippant
>   comments such as "I tinker a lot, so things break, but then I fix
>   them, hooray", "Not bloody likely", or other comments which indicate
>   a cavalier attitude toward software reliability.  
>
>   DEFECTS sections exist for the purpose of listing known areas in
>   which an implementation does not correspond to the specification,
>   along with potential workarounds (if any) and the estimated date
>   of repair.  Now compare this with your typical Unix BUGS section.
>   
>
>   Bill Wolfe, wtwolfe at hubcap.clemson.edu

What, may I be so bold, gives you the right to declare what should or should
not be put in the documentation for a particular piece of code which you have
neither written nor worked on?  If such transgressions from the software
development community so distress you, why remain a member of it?  

 -Chris
-----
Chris Lang    University of Michigan, College of Engineering
home: 4622 Bursley             work: National Center for Manufacturing Sciences
      Ann Arbor, MI  48109           900 Victors Way, Suite 226
      (313) 763-1832                 Ann Arbor, MI  48108
chrisl at caen.engin.umich.edu          (313) 995-0300
"I hate quotations.  Tell me what you know."  - Ralph Waldo Emerson