[SystemSafety] Koopman replies to concerns over Toyota UA case

Derek M Jones derek at knosof.co.uk
Wed Jan 3 20:08:43 CET 2018


Steve,

> This doesn¹t answer the question I wanted to ask. Should there be
> constraints on code structure, Yes or no? And if yes, then what should
> those constraints look like?

People want to know with some probability that software will behave as
intended, and/or less than some probability that something nasty might
happen.

Some people believe that various source code metrics provide reasonably
accurate answers to questions involving software reliability.

If one or more such metrics do provide accurate answers, can the source
be changed in a way that improves reliability?

The answer may be no.

The answer for McCabe's cyclomatic complexity metric, is that it is
possible to modify the code to reduce the value of the metric without
changing the underlying system reliability.

If I ever discover a metric that works and cannot be gamed, I will
post the link of its entry in the patent office database to this list.

> 
> ‹ steve
> 
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: systemsafety <systemsafety-bounces at lists.techfak.uni-bielefeld.de>
> on behalf of Derek M Jones <derek at knosof.co.uk>
> Organization: Knowledge Software, Ltd
> Date: Sunday, December 31, 2017 at 5:32 AM
> To: "systemsafety at lists.techfak.uni-bielefeld.de"
> <systemsafety at lists.techfak.uni-bielefeld.de>
> Subject: Re: [SystemSafety] Koopman replies to concerns over Toyota UA case
> 
> Steve,
> 
>> Are you saying that there should be NO constraints whatsoever on the code
>> a developer writes? Are you willing to accept the following because I
>> have
> 
> I'm saying that people should stop demonizing an easily gamed metric.
> It increases the pressure on people at the sharp end to commit
> account fraud.
> 

-- 
Derek M. Jones           Software analysis
tel: +44 (0)1252 520667  blog:shape-of-code.coding-guidelines.com


More information about the systemsafety mailing list