On 04.10.2013 01:49, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
On Friday, October 04, 2013 01:18:31 deadalnix wrote:
On Thursday, 3 October 2013 at 22:38:18 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
On 10/3/2013 2:15 PM, nazriel wrote:
Music player (as example) do not kill people if they fail.
Aborting whole music player just because Visualisation plugin
had access
violation is pointless.
How does the music player know the fault is in the plugin and
it could be safely continued?
Because a music player can ALWAYS safely continue. Worst case
scenario, if behave erratically and is killed by user.
A car firmware kill people if they behave erratically. The right
choice is to kill it if anything look wrong.
A media player won't kill anyone.
Just because it won't kill anyone doesn't mean that it's okay for it to
continue after it's in a bad state. It could do other nasty things to the
system (including corrupt the files that it's operating on). Once a program's
in an invalid state, all bets are off. I fully concur with Walter that it's
better to kill the program at that point and restart it whether lives are on
the line or not. And if that means that the user sees crashes, oh well.
They'll complain and the developer will have to fix them, which is exactly what
they need to do, because they wouldn't be getting stuff like segfaults or
Errors if their code wasn't broken.
- Jonathan M Davis
Fully agree. We only got in the sore point of today's industry quality
because people got used to have broken applications.
Noone is happy driving a car that kind of works, shoes with shoelaces
that will only work in nights of full moon, ....
Quality should be always a concern, not only when people lives are at stake.
--
Paulo
