[lnkForumImage]
TotalShareware - Download Free Software
Confronta i prezzi di migliaia di prodotti.
Asp Forum
 Home | Login | Register | Search 


 

Forums >

comp.programming.threads

Because read this...

Ramine

12/31/2015 7:56:00 PM

Hello,


You must not to believe this Richard Heathfield of comp.programming
that defend blindly C and C++ with some stupid arguments.

Because read this, it`s the same that i was saying in my previous post:


``If youâ??re performing formal verification before testing, you may argue
that run-time checks are a waste of testing time. After all, they are
never going to fail, right? Well, even with full formal verification,
errors might occur. The compiler you are using might be generating the
wrong code; or the linker might introduce an error; or the hardware
itself may be faulty. Even formal verification systems have been known
to contain errors. When we test formally verified software, any test
failure is symptomatic of a fault in the development process, tool
chain, or hardware. If we test throughly and find no errors, this gives
us confidence that the process and tool chain are sound. Testing with
run-time checks enabled (as well as without, if we intend to ship
without run-time checks) and experiencing no run-time check failures
adds to that confidence.``


Read all here please to understand me more:

http://critical.eschertech.com/2010/07/07/run-time-checks-are-they...


Thank you,
Amine Moulay Ramdane.