I've seen that "no second chance" thing personally and it's hilarious to me. WTF? I would hum "Mars The Bringer of War" to FPGA guys at times because of this (

I've seen that "no second chance" thing personally and it's hilarious to me. WTF? I would hum "Mars The Bringer of War" to FPGA guys at times because of this ( it's the theme used in "The Right Stuff" at Those Times in the movie ). In the general case, no. The economics of software don't favor it. There are tools that inspect code and make helpful suggestions. This is why you can't trust your synthesis tools, BTW. But much worse in software is the cultural ... "zero" ( as in a zero in a filter) about the axis of provability in general. It's a point of despair. I can tell you that in multiple cases, I was able to represent the "core" logic of systems much that I could build a test rig around it and do exhaustive testing ( with the caveat that it's only as good as the test framework ). Permutaitons are reasonably cheap these days. But to do this, you must nearly eschew the us of third party code and in cases, even large parts of standard libraries. But the standard answer is to despair and moan "it's impossible." The "prove it correct" people and the "git 'er done" people are two different tribes.