3 ms·

I couldn't disagree more. Outside of exotic scenarios where things like formal proofing are possible and economically viable I've never seen a process that prev

by msy 1y ago

I couldn't disagree more. Outside of exotic scenarios where things like formal proofing are possible and economically viable I've never seen a process that prevents bugs, only culture. Good engineering cultures are also often ones with well defined and tested processes and good testing practices but it's the culture and people giving a shit that makes the difference, not the other way around. Good product cultures are ones where natural communication between the field and engineering would mean issues get reported back up and make their way to the right people. No process will compensate for people not giving a shit.

benrutter 1y ago
> It's the end result of a process, and that process informs both your software development practices, but also your testing. Your management. Even your sales and servicing. I think the bit I quoted, especially if you read in the context of the article, is talking about culture. I.e. it's talking about a process that informs software development, management and sales. Things like formal proofing and type systems are the exact kind of processes that aren't what it's talking about. I kind of agree with you though about the process/culture distinction - ultimately, if you don't have a culture where people actively care about improving reliability, any process is just gonna become a tick-box exercise to appease management.