5 ms·
Like literally every other engineering discipline, it should be considered software engineering malpractice to use a component that is not guaranteed to be fit
by Veserv 3y ago
Like literally every other engineering discipline, it should be considered software engineering malpractice to use a component that is not guaranteed to be fit for purpose or that you have not audited to be fit for purpose. If that means you can not use some whizbang library because you do not know if it works and you are too lazy to figure that out for certain, tough.
But I want to use the random steel sheets of unknown quality I found lying around to make a airplane is not a acceptable position. But, this does not mean you need to use aircraft grade steel everywhere. You just need to use things at a appropriate level for your purpose.
If they really must use software that guarantees nothing, then they must verify it works for their purpose or pay somebody to make it fit for their purpose, simple as that.
- eesmith 3y agoSo, no Python, no gcc, no R, ... even Visual Studio says "The software is licensed “as-is.” You bear the risk of using it. Microsoft gives no express warranties, guarantees or conditions. To the extent permitted under your local laws, Microsoft excludes the implied warranties of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose and non-infringement." and limits direct damages to $5.00. What software do you use which is guaranteed to be fit for purpose and/or have fully audited?