×
The internal search function is temporarily non-functional. The current search engine is no longer viable and we are researching alternatives.
As a stop gap measure, we are using Google's custom search engine service.
If you know of an easy to use, open source, search engine ... please contact support@midrange.com.
On the topic of bugs...
Ed McVaney of J.D. Edwards for a time had a newsletter that he called the
"Rolling Letter".
I recall one particularly amusing issue from the late 80's - early 90's,
where he was discussing bugs in the JDE package. In an attempt to make a
point that JDE had a low number of bugs, he described it using a formula
that shows the number of bugs per line of code in the package.
His formula:
Number of bugs per line of code = (Number of known bugs / Number of lines of
code in the package)
His specific example of this was something like:
"As of this edition of the Rolling Letter, we have approximately 440 known
bugs, and there are approximately 10,000,000 lines of code in the entire JDE
package."
His resulting statement in the Rolling Letter...
"So, the current number of bugs per line of code = (440 / 10,000,000) * 100
= .000044 or there is currently .0044 % bugs per line of code in the JDE
package."
This was highly amusing to me, since this is simply an illustration of the
old Mark Twain saying:
"There are Lies, Damned Lies, and Statistics..."
Why?
Because JDE, like many other vendors, will not always take credit for the
TRUE number of bugs found in their package.
Over a period of approximately 15 years, I almost NEVER got JDE technical
support to admit that they had a bug in any of their code - they would
typically respond in one of four ways:
1) Have you modified the code? If so, then YOU obviously introduced the
bug when you modified the program. (I learned to answer this question NO
after the first call - I would first perform a test to determine if the bug
I was reporting existed in their original pristine code BEFORE I called to
report it - and in almost every case it DID!)
2) We can't duplicate the error that you described on OUR system (therefore
it MUST NOT exist!)
3) The program is working as designed (Answer given MOST often!)
4) We have identified this problem (a very rare occasion indeed), and it
will be fixed in the next release. If you can't wait for the next release
or you are rev-locked, you can apply a "paper" fix to your code, but we
won't guarantee it!.
SO, to make a short story long, the true number of bugs in the JDE code was
probably more like 4400 than 440, since MOST of us had given up on
attempting to get JDE to fix the problems - we just fixed it ourselves, if
we had the source code for the program.
Regards and LOL,
Steve Landess
Austin, Texas
(512) 423-0935
This mailing list archive is Copyright 1997-2024 by midrange.com and David Gibbs as a compilation work. Use of the archive is restricted to research of a business or technical nature. Any other uses are prohibited. Full details are available on our policy page. If you have questions about this, please contact
[javascript protected email address].
Operating expenses for this site are earned using the Amazon Associate program and Google Adsense.
midrange.com
