Do you realize that you're plain in what Dijkstra criticizes? All you say is being contered in the talk. > [..] way too big to test every possible code path H

Do you realize that you're plain in what Dijkstra criticizes? All you say is being contered in the talk. > [..] way too big to test every possible code path He disregards tests. Most are futile. Maybe automated testing could make some sense (fuzzing, quickcheck, etc), but still, most are stupidly weak and offer no guarantee whatsoever (even quantitatively). > I'd rather have an OS with a few bugs than no OS at all. He specifically argues for error instead of bug so that we can't say it's "almost correct" but only that it is "wrong". "a few bugs" is just "wrong".