From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
To: 9fans@cse.psu.edu
Subject: Re: [9fans] GUI toolkit for Plan 9
From: anothy@cosym.net
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Message-Id: <20020228171926.885C2199EC@mail.cse.psu.edu>
Date: Thu, 28 Feb 2002 12:19:19 -0500
Topicbox-Message-UUID: 5c3a954c-eaca-11e9-9e20-41e7f4b1d025

lucio said:
	Adding code to a computer program increases the
	probability of its being incorrect.  Prove me wrong.
then tb responded:
	Your argument is bogus, then.  If *that's* all you mean,
	then you have an argument against *ever* adding *any*
	feature to *anything*, since you would be getting
	"probably gains" and earning "possible incorrect behavior".

tb's extention of lucio's argument does not logically follow. in a
strict logical sense, this is probably because lucio isn't even
_making_ an argument (so it can't be bogus). one can indeed
make some inferences from lucio's assertion (tb: do you argue
with the assertion?), however. it seems tb reads lucio to be
implying something along these lines:
	adding code to a program increases its probability of
	being incorrect, THEREFOR you shouldn't add any code
	to any programs
but i think what lucio, and probably most of the people on the
8c side of the recent 8c/gcc discussion, meant is more like:
	adding code to a program increases its probability of
	being incorrect, THEREFOR you should be sure any gains
	won by this code are greater than this risk.
i don't think anyone here would seriously argue that the
cost/gain decisions should never be made, but rather that the
way the decisions were/are made in gcc is incorrect.
ア