3 ms·
There is no mathematically rigorous way of proving that any given piece of code does or doesn't do anything. It all depends on the context in which the code is
by godDLL 17y ago
There is no mathematically rigorous way of proving that any given piece of code does or doesn't do anything. It all depends on the context in which the code is being used.
Building software is a trial-and-error process, and building large pieces of software is a large trial-and-error process. They are asking for the impossible, like providing airport security or anything of a similar scale.
If a law is made of this it will serve nothing but annoyance to actual users of said software. There is just no conceivable way anyone could regulate and enforce that law. It's a good idea in general but it shouldn't have an application in legislation, that's like forbidding pigeons to litter monuments -- no offence, but what the...
- yummyfajitas 17y agoThere is no mathematically rigorous way of proving that any given piece of code does or doesn't do anything. Sure there is. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Formal_verification http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Formal_verification
- dhs 17y agoFormal verification works for algorithms, but not for interactions.
- godDLL 17y agoRun it on MS Word X, then. Or OOO v3. And draw any meaningful conclusions from that data. Better yet, how do I write reliable software that runs on a buggy processor? What do I use to test that the chip I'm making does what it is supposed to every time for all scenarios? It's programmable, after all. That, I'm sure, you can identify with.
- ori_b 17y agoThat proves that it conforms to the specified behavior. It doesn't prove that the specified behavior is correct or useful.