In alt.fan.frank.mccoy Daytek <Daytek@This.News.Group> wrote:
>SOFTWARE DEVELOPMENT CYCLE
>
>by
>
>David Lubar
>
>Software doesn't just appear on the shelves by magic. That program
>shrink-wrapped inside the box along with the indecipherable manual and
>twelve-paragraph disclaimer notice actually came to you by way of an
>elaborate path through the most rigid quality control methods on the
>planet. Here, shared for the first time with the general public, are the
>inside details of the program development cycle.
>
>
>1. Programmer produces code he believes is bug-free.
>
>2. Product is tested. Twenty bugs are found.
>
>3. Programmer fixes ten of the bugs and explains to the testing.
>department that the other ten aren't really bugs.
>
>4. Testing department finds that five of the fixes didn't work and
>discovers fifteen new bugs.
>
>5. See 3.
>
>6. See 4.
>
>7. See 5.
>
>8. See 6.
>
>9. See 7.
>
>10. See 8.
>
>11. Due to marketing pressure and extremely pre-mature product
>announcement based on over-optimistic programming schedule, the product
>is released.
>
>12. Users find 137 new bugs.
>
>13. Original programmer, having cashed his royalty check, is nowhere to
>be found.
>
>14. Newly-assembled programming team fixes almost all of the 137 bugs,
>but introduces 456 new ones.
>
>15. Original programmer sends underpaid testing department a postcard
>from Fiji. Entire testing department quits.
>
>16. Company is bought in hostile takeover by competitor using profits
>from their latest release, which had 783 bugs.
>
>17. New CEO is brought in by board of directors. He hires programmer to
>redo program from scratch.
>
>18. Programmer produces code he believes is bug-free.
>
>19. See 2.
>
>
>Copyright ?1996 by David Lubar
>
>---------------
>thought you might like this.
>
>daytek
Heh, heh. Sounds close; but I could make a few corrections.
;-}
--
_____
/ ' / ™
,-/-, __ __. ____ /_
(_/ / (_(_/|_/ / <_/ <_
|
|