Re: [isabelle] "blast" eliminates unrelated flex-flex pairs in Isabelle2013-1 and Isabelle2013-2.
Your constant language policing makes this mailing list extremely noisy and
unpleasant. You should leave the terminology with which people report their
findings to them. To suggest that the quality of some software is influenced by
the language in which users write about it is bizzare.
Am 10/12/2013 11:36, schrieb Makarius:
> On Tue, 10 Dec 2013, David Greenaway wrote:
>>> Note that in these threads there was never any talk about "bugs" nor
>>> "fixes" -- the notoriously meaningless words. The NEWS entry correctly
>>> anticipates some "potential INCOMPATIBILITY", although I did not know
>>> about this particular case when writing that piece of text.
>> When I use the word "bug", I tend to mean a behaviour of a computer program
>> that is unexpected, unintended and undesirable.
> That thinking is now very common, but it is counter-productive far serious
> software development, especially due all the extra complexity that has been
> piled up in the past decades and people no longer knowing how it was all done.
> We are running into a major problem here -- the next big software crisis, which
> will be also an open-source software crisis in particular.
> Some years ago, I've ventured to extend our little island of happiness (based on
> Isabelle/ML) into the "real world", using Isabelle/Scala and Isabelle/jEdit
> etc. Moreover there was the ambition to make it work on all major platforms.
> It was both surprising and depressing how low the quality of these things from
> the "mainstream" actually are, and all these people using terminology like
> "features", "bugs", "fixes", "unfortunate" without much reflection.
> Anyway, this is getting a bit far off this thread ...
This archive was generated by a fusion of
Pipermail (Mailman edition) and