Nonsense. While buildings and bridges certainly do fail, and they require significant expertise to design and build correctly, they do not collapse because of o

Nonsense. While buildings and bridges certainly do fail, and they require significant expertise to design and build correctly, they do not collapse because of one misplaced bolt. One misplaced *p++? Segmentation fault. http://groups.csail.mit.edu/mac/projects/amorphous/workshop-sept-99/robust-diversity.pdf http://groups.csail.mit.edu/mac/projects/amorphous/workshop-... The real problem with people calling programming "software engineering" is that programmers have absolutely no idea which processes actually produce more reliable software. There's a lot of hand-waving and anecdotes, and no solid or reproducible results anywhere. TDD this, agile that, waterfall this other thing. All of it still produces buggy software which crashes, corrupts data, and otherwise makes programs unreliable. Relatively bug-free software is always the product of really smart people who made very few mistakes and tested thoroughly, and never the product of any particular "process" which generalizes well even to another group of smart people. (Just look at the arguments which arise here on HN every time TDD comes up.)