Is it? Look at the rest of the document. It is almost clear from the errors you can find throughout the document that this "report" was posted from some origin

Is it? Look at the rest of the document. It is almost clear from the errors you can find throughout the document that this "report" was posted from some original hard copy run through some form of OCR. I think this is a particular example of it. Why the number of LOC is 101000? Maybe the OCR interpreted a bad comma from scanning as a "1", in which case the number would have read 10,000 LOC - and thus "twenty errors". As another glaring example of this OCR issue, look for this line: > "There were [.4ECL] people sitting in our offices telling us it [the Therac-25] couldn't hurt anybody when they knew it could." "[.4ECL]"? It should read "[AECL]" - but the scan or the copy it was scanned from probably had a small break on the arm of the "A" - which the OCR interpreted as ".4" You can find other small anomalies like this elsewhere in the document if you look for them. They kinda bugged me, but I could tell from the pixels what was going on. ;) EDIT: My own mistakes fixed...sigh