Comments for Bertrand Meyer's technology+ blog http://bertrandmeyer.com Software engineering, programming methodology, languages, verification, general technology, publication culture, and more Sun, 19 May 2013 02:04:28 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1 Comment on What is wrong with CMMI by erick http://bertrandmeyer.com/2013/05/12/what-is-wrong-with-cmmi/comment-page-1/#comment-7733 erick Sun, 19 May 2013 02:04:28 +0000 http://bertrandmeyer.com/?p=3343#comment-7733 Thanks for the examples and their critique, it is enlightening for a would-be technical writer like me to see clarity comes out of confusion. In revising my master thesis, I did notice that sometimes bad writing comes out of insufficiently crisp thinking. But I am still at a stage where it is difficult for me to recognize when it is the case and how to remedy it effectively. What references would you suggest on technical writing? Especially for non-native speakers? I keep hearing of "The Elements of Style" but there surely are others. Would you also have examples of particularly well-written documents that could serve as inspiration? Thanks! Thanks for the examples and their critique, it is enlightening for a would-be technical writer like me to see clarity comes out of confusion. In revising my master thesis, I did notice that sometimes bad writing comes out of insufficiently crisp thinking. But I am still at a stage where it is difficult for me to recognize when it is the case and how to remedy it effectively.

What references would you suggest on technical writing? Especially for non-native speakers? I keep hearing of “The Elements of Style” but there surely are others.
Would you also have examples of particularly well-written documents that could serve as inspiration?

Thanks!

]]> Comment on New series: Reading Notes by Bertrand Meyer's technology+ blog » Blog Archive » Reading notes: the design of bug fixes http://bertrandmeyer.com/2013/05/17/new-series-reading-notes/comment-page-1/#comment-7724 Bertrand Meyer's technology+ blog » Blog Archive » Reading notes: the design of bug fixes Sat, 18 May 2013 19:28:32 +0000 http://bertrandmeyer.com/?p=3543#comment-7724 [...] Earlier columns « New series: Reading Notes [...] [...] Earlier columns « New series: Reading Notes [...]

]]> Comment on Adult entertainment by Larry http://bertrandmeyer.com/2013/05/17/adult-entertainment/comment-page-1/#comment-7661 Larry Fri, 17 May 2013 22:00:38 +0000 http://bertrandmeyer.com/?p=3448#comment-7661 Actually, I often look at our Eiffel code and see it as a work of art. From our perspective, it is quite a lovely literary work, which is enjoyable to read, understand and develop. I suppose the trivial and quite juvenile attitude demonstrated above is why the children will never play with the adult toys and will keep pretending that their Legos and blocks truly do represent the real thing. Actually, I often look at our Eiffel code and see it as a work of art. From our perspective, it is quite a lovely literary work, which is enjoyable to read, understand and develop. I suppose the trivial and quite juvenile attitude demonstrated above is why the children will never play with the adult toys and will keep pretending that their Legos and blocks truly do represent the real thing.

]]> Comment on Habit, happiness, and programming languages by Bertrand Meyer's technology+ blog » Blog Archive » Adult entertainment http://bertrandmeyer.com/2012/10/22/habit-happiness-and-mainstream-programming-languages/comment-page-1/#comment-7631 Bertrand Meyer's technology+ blog » Blog Archive » Adult entertainment Fri, 17 May 2013 14:15:02 +0000 http://bertrandmeyer.com/?p=2817#comment-7631 [...] [1] Habit, happiness and programming languages, article in this blog, 22 October 2012, see here. [...] [...] [1] Habit, happiness and programming languages, article in this blog, 22 October 2012, see here. [...]

]]> Comment on Apocalypse no! (Part 2) by Bertrand Meyer's technology+ blog » Blog Archive » Apocalypse no! (part 1) http://bertrandmeyer.com/2013/05/16/apocalypse-no-part-2/comment-page-1/#comment-7526 Bertrand Meyer's technology+ blog » Blog Archive » Apocalypse no! (part 1) Thu, 16 May 2013 06:51:22 +0000 http://bertrandmeyer.com/?p=3394#comment-7526 [...] the Dust, Wiley, 2012. [2] Part 2 of the present article was published on 16 May 2013 and appears here. VN:F [1.9.10_1130]please wait...Rating: 10.0/10 (5 votes cast)VN:F [1.9.10_1130]Rating: +1 (from 3 [...] [...] the Dust, Wiley, 2012. [2] Part 2 of the present article was published on 16 May 2013 and appears here. VN:F [1.9.10_1130]please wait…Rating: 10.0/10 (5 votes cast)VN:F [1.9.10_1130]Rating: +1 (from 3 [...]

]]> Comment on Bringing C code to the modern world by Larry http://bertrandmeyer.com/2013/04/29/bringing-c-code-to-the-modern-world/comment-page-1/#comment-6437 Larry Mon, 29 Apr 2013 17:28:48 +0000 http://bertrandmeyer.com/?p=3291#comment-6437 I am already a strong admirer and growing adherent to the work of C2Eif. I applaud Marco for his courage to take up such a daunting challenge and produce a remarkable work. I sincerely pray and hope Marco finds success in his doctoral pursuit and takes C2Eif to ever greater heights. Bertrand's outline of the work and the EWG are both enlightening and pragmatic. I will be putting these matters to work almost immediately. Again -- Marco ... KUDOS and applause! Well done! I am already a strong admirer and growing adherent to the work of C2Eif. I applaud Marco for his courage to take up such a daunting challenge and produce a remarkable work. I sincerely pray and hope Marco finds success in his doctoral pursuit and takes C2Eif to ever greater heights. Bertrand’s outline of the work and the EWG are both enlightening and pragmatic. I will be putting these matters to work almost immediately. Again — Marco … KUDOS and applause! Well done!

]]> Comment on More expressive loops for Eiffel by Larry http://bertrandmeyer.com/2010/01/26/more-expressive-loops-for-eiffel/comment-page-1/#comment-5637 Larry Sun, 14 Apr 2013 13:36:18 +0000 http://bertrandmeyer.com/?p=990#comment-5637 Nevermind -- I answered my own question upon careful reading. BTW: Some (not all) of the "complaints" about the lack of "good documentation" for Eiffel, I am starting to find as relatively false arguments, which stem from what appear to range from simple laziness and lack of attention-to-detail to a lack of formal training (such as my own self over the last two years). I have found some of the documentation to be missing key ingredients needed to fully implement various bits, but for the most part, I am finding that there are several very good resources that (when formed together) answer just about everything: 1. The ECMA Standard 2. OOSC-2 3. Touch of Class 4. Eiffel.com Documentation 5. ... and let's not forget ... The Eiffel Library code itself! There are other resources as well: 6. The GOBO library documentation (excellently written) 7. The Eiffel User Group threads on Yahoo Groups (God forbid it ever be lost) 8. Manu and the Eiffel Software Staff (you all ought to have your minds downloaded and archived! :-) ) 9. The host of Eiffel users in the community (see #7 above) 10. Google and other search engines 11. Blogs, including this one And perhaps others. The key is then to either enhance those resources where possible (e.g. in the Yahoo Groups community, post a complete writeup of any answers we personally find to help document for others behind us). If an external resource cannot be enhanced, then start a blog, create Wiki, add notes somewhere. Anyhow -- that is my two cents on the matter. Nevermind — I answered my own question upon careful reading.

BTW: Some (not all) of the “complaints” about the lack of “good documentation” for Eiffel, I am starting to find as relatively false arguments, which stem from what appear to range from simple laziness and lack of attention-to-detail to a lack of formal training (such as my own self over the last two years). I have found some of the documentation to be missing key ingredients needed to fully implement various bits, but for the most part, I am finding that there are several very good resources that (when formed together) answer just about everything:

1. The ECMA Standard
2. OOSC-2
3. Touch of Class
4. Eiffel.com Documentation
5. … and let’s not forget … The Eiffel Library code itself!

There are other resources as well:

6. The GOBO library documentation (excellently written)
7. The Eiffel User Group threads on Yahoo Groups (God forbid it ever be lost)
8. Manu and the Eiffel Software Staff (you all ought to have your minds downloaded and archived! :-) )
9. The host of Eiffel users in the community (see #7 above)
10. Google and other search engines
11. Blogs, including this one

And perhaps others.

The key is then to either enhance those resources where possible (e.g. in the Yahoo Groups community, post a complete writeup of any answers we personally find to help document for others behind us). If an external resource cannot be enhanced, then start a blog, create Wiki, add notes somewhere.

Anyhow — that is my two cents on the matter.

]]> Comment on More expressive loops for Eiffel by Larry http://bertrandmeyer.com/2010/01/26/more-expressive-loops-for-eiffel/comment-page-1/#comment-5636 Larry Sun, 14 Apr 2013 13:15:10 +0000 http://bertrandmeyer.com/?p=990#comment-5636 Would it be the ECMA Standard, 8.5.24? If so, is there something in-depth? OOSC-2? Would it be the ECMA Standard, 8.5.24? If so, is there something in-depth? OOSC-2?

]]> Comment on More expressive loops for Eiffel by Larry http://bertrandmeyer.com/2010/01/26/more-expressive-loops-for-eiffel/comment-page-1/#comment-5635 Larry Sun, 14 Apr 2013 13:12:49 +0000 http://bertrandmeyer.com/?p=990#comment-5635 Bertrand, I am looking for a definition/discussion of "unfolded form", "folded form" and "partially unfolded form". Can you point me towards something directly related to Eiffel? Bertrand, I am looking for a definition/discussion of “unfolded form”, “folded form” and “partially unfolded form”. Can you point me towards something directly related to Eiffel?

]]> Comment on The origin of “software engineering” by [Link] First use of software engineering term | Look back in respect http://bertrandmeyer.com/2013/04/04/the-origin-of-software-engineering/comment-page-1/#comment-4980 [Link] First use of software engineering term | Look back in respect Thu, 04 Apr 2013 18:11:39 +0000 http://bertrandmeyer.com/?p=3278#comment-4980 [...] a post titled <The origin of “software engineering”> Bertrand Meyer writes that the term was not coined in 1968 during the famous NATO conference [...] [...] a post titled <The origin of “software engineering”> Bertrand Meyer writes that the term was not coined in 1968 during the famous NATO conference [...]

]]> Comment on The origin of “software engineering” by In the News: 2013-04-04 | Klaus' Korner http://bertrandmeyer.com/2013/04/04/the-origin-of-software-engineering/comment-page-1/#comment-4972 In the News: 2013-04-04 | Klaus' Korner Thu, 04 Apr 2013 14:32:43 +0000 http://bertrandmeyer.com/?p=3278#comment-4972 [...] Programming News: The origin of “software engineering” Again and again everyone and his sister repeats the canard that the term “software engineering” was coined on the occasion of the eponymous 1968 NATO conference. A mistake repeated in every software engineering textbook remains a mistake. Below is a note I published twenty years ago on the topic in a newsgroup discussion. I found it in an archive here, where you can find the longer exchange of which it was part. Read full story => BertrandMeyer [...] [...] Programming News: The origin of “software engineering” Again and again everyone and his sister repeats the canard that the term “software engineering” was coined on the occasion of the eponymous 1968 NATO conference. A mistake repeated in every software engineering textbook remains a mistake. Below is a note I published twenty years ago on the topic in a newsgroup discussion. I found it in an archive here, where you can find the longer exchange of which it was part. Read full story => BertrandMeyer [...]

]]> Comment on The ABC of software engineering by Marko http://bertrandmeyer.com/2013/03/25/the-abc-of-software-engineering/comment-page-1/#comment-4600 Marko Wed, 27 Mar 2013 21:49:40 +0000 http://bertrandmeyer.com/?p=3255#comment-4600 I like the ABC characterization. The danger I see is underestimating the criticality of software. Users will use software in unforeseen contexts and the behavior of some innocuous piece of software might become critical due to the context in which it is used. For example, let's say a friend developed a piece of software to algorithmically generate "elevator music" on my phone. If I use that piece of software while driving a car, connecting my phone to the car stereo, I make it acute. There are many kinds of defects this software might have that could lead to accidents. For example, it could suddenly and abruptly blare some extremely loud noise over the car's stereo causing shock and complete distraction from traffic. Software gets used in ways and in contexts that were not anticipated when it was designed and written. I would therefore suspect that there is a general underestimation of the criticality of software. I like the ABC characterization.

The danger I see is underestimating the criticality of software. Users will use software in unforeseen contexts and the behavior of some innocuous piece of software might become critical due to the context in which it is used. For example, let’s say a friend developed a piece of software to algorithmically generate “elevator music” on my phone. If I use that piece of software while driving a car, connecting my phone to the car stereo, I make it acute. There are many kinds of defects this software might have that could lead to accidents. For example, it could suddenly and abruptly blare some extremely loud noise over the car’s stereo causing shock and complete distraction from traffic.

Software gets used in ways and in contexts that were not anticipated when it was designed and written. I would therefore suspect that there is a general underestimation of the criticality of software.

]]> Comment on The ABC of software engineering by eric.verhulst http://bertrandmeyer.com/2013/03/25/the-abc-of-software-engineering/comment-page-1/#comment-4549 eric.verhulst Tue, 26 Mar 2013 19:09:05 +0000 http://bertrandmeyer.com/?p=3255#comment-4549 The Cockburn scale makes in my opinion the same mistake as the SIL (Safety Integrity Level) concept. Both are system level properties and one cannot deduce that these properties will be achieved by following a certain process, even if more formal and more rigorous process will likely lead to higher quality systems. As such software is a component in a system and together with other components (e.g. the hardware) we can reach a certain safety level. The issue is that we have no real criterium for qualifying a component independently of the process followed. Therefore we came up with the Assured Reliability and Resilience Levels or ARRL for short. There are defined as follows: - ARRLO: Nothing is garanteed ("use as is"). - ARRL1: The functionality is guaranteed as far as it was tested. This leaves the untested cases as a potential domain of errors. - ARRL2: The functionality is guaranteed in all cases if no fault occurs. This requires formal evidence covering all system states. - ARRL3: The functionality is fail-safe (errors are not propagated) or switches to a reduced operational mode upon a fault. The fault behavior is predictable as well as the next state after the fault. This requires fault detection mechanisms as well monitoring so that errors are contained and the system can be brought into a controlled state again. - ARRL4: If a major fault occurs, the functionality is maintained and the system is degraded to the ARRL3 level. Transient faults are masked out. This requires redundancy, e.g. TMR (Triple Modular Redundancy). - ARRL5: To cope with residual common mode failures, the TMR is implemented using heterogeneous redundancy. Awaiting a publication on this see a presentation at http://www.altreonic.com/content/cross-domain-systems-and-safety-engineering-it-feasible The Cockburn scale makes in my opinion the same mistake as the SIL (Safety Integrity Level) concept. Both are system level properties and one cannot deduce that these properties will be achieved by following a certain process, even if more formal and more rigorous process will likely lead to higher quality systems. As such software is a component in a system and together with other components (e.g. the hardware) we can reach a certain safety level. The issue is that we have no real criterium for qualifying a component independently of the process followed. Therefore we came up with the Assured Reliability and Resilience Levels or ARRL for short. There are defined as follows:
- ARRLO: Nothing is garanteed (“use as is”).
- ARRL1: The functionality is guaranteed as far as it was tested. This leaves the untested cases as a potential domain of errors.
- ARRL2: The functionality is guaranteed in all cases if no fault occurs. This requires formal evidence covering all system states.
- ARRL3: The functionality is fail-safe (errors are not propagated) or switches to a reduced operational mode upon a fault. The fault behavior is predictable as well as the next state after the fault. This requires fault detection mechanisms as well monitoring so that errors are contained and the system can be brought into a controlled state again.
- ARRL4: If a major fault occurs, the functionality is maintained and the system is degraded to the ARRL3 level. Transient faults are masked out. This requires redundancy, e.g. TMR (Triple Modular Redundancy).
- ARRL5: To cope with residual common mode failures, the TMR is implemented using heterogeneous redundancy.
Awaiting a publication on this see a presentation at http://www.altreonic.com/content/cross-domain-systems-and-safety-engineering-it-feasible

]]> Comment on The ABC of software engineering by Bertrand Meyer http://bertrandmeyer.com/2013/03/25/the-abc-of-software-engineering/comment-page-1/#comment-4517 Bertrand Meyer Tue, 26 Mar 2013 06:22:09 +0000 http://bertrandmeyer.com/?p=3255#comment-4517 Alistair Cockburn pointed to his scale: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cockburn_Scale, which is more sophisticated than the "ABC" classification but also integrates size. Alistair Cockburn pointed to his scale: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cockburn_Scale, which is more sophisticated than the “ABC” classification but also integrates size.

]]> Comment on Your IP: does Google care? by redman http://bertrandmeyer.com/2013/01/28/your-ip-does-google-care-2/comment-page-1/#comment-3212 redman Wed, 27 Feb 2013 18:04:31 +0000 http://bertrandmeyer.com/?p=3155#comment-3212 One might wonder how many citations the book would have received had there been no free copies available for downloading. Just food for thought... One might wonder how many citations the book would have received had there been no free copies available for downloading. Just food for thought…

]]> Comment on Your IP: does Google care? by packetslave http://bertrandmeyer.com/2013/01/28/your-ip-does-google-care-2/comment-page-1/#comment-3103 packetslave Sun, 24 Feb 2013 17:08:02 +0000 http://bertrandmeyer.com/?p=3155#comment-3103 Actually, strike that, I was mistaken. We removed the ittelkom.ac.id PDF from Scholar as well. The PDF that's currently linked in the search results is a *different* one, hosted at www.stttelkom.ac.id/staf/apk/ngajar/... different domain and path than what is listed in your complaint. If you submit a DMCA complaint for that one using the same process, I imagine it will be reviewed and removed the same way. Actually, strike that, I was mistaken. We removed the ittelkom.ac.id PDF from Scholar as well. The PDF that’s currently linked in the search results is a *different* one, hosted at http://www.stttelkom.ac.id/staf/apk/ngajar/... different domain and path than what is listed in your complaint.

If you submit a DMCA complaint for that one using the same process, I imagine it will be reviewed and removed the same way.

]]> Comment on Your IP: does Google care? by packetslave http://bertrandmeyer.com/2013/01/28/your-ip-does-google-care-2/comment-page-1/#comment-3100 packetslave Sun, 24 Feb 2013 15:31:51 +0000 http://bertrandmeyer.com/?p=3155#comment-3100 This is fairly interesting, actually. Scholar shows your DMCA complaint at the bottom of the search results, indicating we got it and processed it successfully. It shows 1 link removed, and if you do an ordinary web search for [site:www.ittelkom.ac.id "bertrand meyer"] you'll note that the PDF doesn't appear (but the DMCA complaint does). However, Scholar is still attaching the PDF link to the citation. I smell a bug. Will report this to the Scholar and/or takedown-handling people internally on Monday. (as an aside, it's somewhat ironic that I had to register for a random Wordpress account AND solve a Captcha just to comment on this post). This is fairly interesting, actually. Scholar shows your DMCA complaint at the bottom of the search results, indicating we got it and processed it successfully. It shows 1 link removed, and if you do an ordinary web search for [site:www.ittelkom.ac.id "bertrand meyer"] you’ll note that the PDF doesn’t appear (but the DMCA complaint does). However, Scholar is still attaching the PDF link to the citation.

I smell a bug. Will report this to the Scholar and/or takedown-handling people internally on Monday.

(as an aside, it’s somewhat ironic that I had to register for a random WordPress account AND solve a Captcha just to comment on this post).

]]> Comment on Conferences: Publication, Communication, Sanction by Bertrand Meyer's technology+ blog » Blog Archive » The waves of publication http://bertrandmeyer.com/2013/02/06/conferemces-publication-communication-sanction/comment-page-1/#comment-2930 Bertrand Meyer's technology+ blog » Blog Archive » The waves of publication Wed, 20 Feb 2013 17:38:56 +0000 http://bertrandmeyer.com/?p=3193#comment-2930 [...] Earlier columns « Conferences: Publication, Communication, Sanction [...] [...] Earlier columns « Conferences: Publication, Communication, Sanction [...]

]]> Comment on The Modes and Uses of Scientific Publication by Bertrand Meyer's technology+ blog » Blog Archive » Conferemces: Publication, Communication, Sanction http://bertrandmeyer.com/2011/11/22/the-modes-and-uses-of-scientific-publication/comment-page-1/#comment-2528 Bertrand Meyer's technology+ blog » Blog Archive » Conferemces: Publication, Communication, Sanction Wed, 06 Feb 2013 17:18:52 +0000 http://bertrandmeyer.com/?p=2018#comment-2528 [...] Meyer: The Modes and Uses of Scientific Publication, article on this blog, 22 November 2011, see here. VN:F [1.9.10_1130]please wait...Rating: 0.0/10 (0 votes cast)VN:F [1.9.10_1130]Rating: 0 (from 0 [...] [...] Meyer: The Modes and Uses of Scientific Publication, article on this blog, 22 November 2011, see here. VN:F [1.9.10_1130]please wait…Rating: 0.0/10 (0 votes cast)VN:F [1.9.10_1130]Rating: 0 (from 0 [...]

]]> Comment on Master, please explain: “impotence” by Banjobeni http://bertrandmeyer.com/2013/02/02/master-please-explain-impotence/comment-page-1/#comment-2405 Banjobeni Sat, 02 Feb 2013 21:40:47 +0000 http://bertrandmeyer.com/?p=3116#comment-2405 I wish I could! I wish I could!

]]> Comment on Your IP: does Google care? by colin-adams http://bertrandmeyer.com/2013/01/28/your-ip-does-google-care-2/comment-page-1/#comment-2339 colin-adams Fri, 01 Feb 2013 08:09:15 +0000 http://bertrandmeyer.com/?p=3155#comment-2339 My copy of OOSC2 has a CD at the back with the full contents of the book provided as separate PDF files for each chapter. Access to the CD is protected by a copyright instructions that need to be torn before getting at it. I assume that it is this that is the source of the pirated copy? "But why pay? Google invites you to read it for free. Just follow the link they obligingly provide at [1]." I assume that last sentence was meant sarcastically? If so, and if you intend to pursue the organization for damages, you had better make it clear, as otherwise it could be construed as permission to freely download the book. Several years ago, the company I work for purchased 4 copies of OOSC2 for use by staff in our London office. I don't recall, but I guess they must also have CDs inside their back covers. Would we be entitled to load these onto our company intranet? I presume not, and each one could only be mounted on a local CD drive. My copy of OOSC2 has a CD at the back with the full contents of the book provided as separate PDF files for each chapter. Access to the CD is protected by a copyright instructions that need to be torn before getting at it. I assume that it is this that is the source of the pirated copy?

“But why pay? Google invites you to read it for free. Just follow the link they obligingly provide at [1].”

I assume that last sentence was meant sarcastically? If so, and if you intend to pursue the organization for damages, you had better make it clear, as otherwise it could be construed as permission to freely download the book.

Several years ago, the company I work for purchased 4 copies of OOSC2 for use by staff in our London office. I don’t recall, but I guess they must also have CDs inside their back covers. Would we be entitled to load these onto our company intranet? I presume not, and each one could only be mounted on a local CD drive.

]]> Comment on Your IP: does Google care? by Peter Gummer http://bertrandmeyer.com/2013/01/28/your-ip-does-google-care-2/comment-page-1/#comment-2219 Peter Gummer Wed, 30 Jan 2013 01:15:58 +0000 http://bertrandmeyer.com/?p=3155#comment-2219 Musicians have similar problems: http://www.digitalmusicnews.com/stories/101311cc "You will appreciate that there is huge difference between someone inviting a guest into their home (where they have a choice in advance) and someone moving into your home uninvited and then giving you the chance to evict them. Particularly if that same uninvited guest returns every day until they are evicted again - at your own expense." Musicians have similar problems:

http://www.digitalmusicnews.com/stories/101311cc

“You will appreciate that there is huge difference between someone inviting a guest into their home (where they have a choice in advance) and someone moving into your home uninvited and then giving you the chance to evict them. Particularly if that same uninvited guest returns every day until they are evicted again – at your own expense.”

]]> Comment on Domain Theory: the forgotten step in program verification by Bertrand Meyer's technology+ blog » Blog Archive » How good are strong specifications (new paper, ICSE 2013) http://bertrandmeyer.com/2012/04/11/domain-theory-the-forgotten-step-in-program-verification/comment-page-1/#comment-1981 Bertrand Meyer's technology+ blog » Blog Archive » How good are strong specifications (new paper, ICSE 2013) Tue, 22 Jan 2013 23:56:38 +0000 http://bertrandmeyer.com/?p=2281#comment-1981 [...] [1] Bertrand Meyer: Domain Theory: the forgotten step in program verification, article on this blog, see here. [...] [...] [1] Bertrand Meyer: Domain Theory: the forgotten step in program verification, article on this blog, see here. [...]

]]> Comment on ESEC/FSE 2013: 18-26 August, Saint Petersburg, Russia by kentrob http://bertrandmeyer.com/2012/12/17/esecfse-2013-18-26-august-saint-petersburg-russia/comment-page-1/#comment-1515 kentrob Wed, 19 Dec 2012 11:15:18 +0000 http://bertrandmeyer.com/?p=3016#comment-1515 I recently started getting an error on your RSS feed. Firefox doesn't give me an error but the folder won't expand. Google Chrome gives this error: This page contains the following errors: error on line 243 at column 30: Input is not proper UTF-8, indicate encoding ! Bytes: 0x0C 0x66 0x69 0x6E Below is a rendering of the page up to the first error. I recently started getting an error on your RSS feed. Firefox doesn’t give me an error but the folder won’t expand. Google Chrome gives this error:

This page contains the following errors:

error on line 243 at column 30: Input is not proper UTF-8, indicate encoding !
Bytes: 0x0C 0×66 0×69 0x6E
Below is a rendering of the page up to the first error.

]]> Comment on ESEC/FSE 2013: 18-26 August, Saint Petersburg, Russia by Bertrand Meyer http://bertrandmeyer.com/2012/12/17/esecfse-2013-18-26-august-saint-petersburg-russia/comment-page-1/#comment-1493 Bertrand Meyer Tue, 18 Dec 2012 06:32:36 +0000 http://bertrandmeyer.com/?p=3016#comment-1493 The link to the venue (Razumosky palace, http://esec-fse.inf.ethz.ch/venue.html) was broken and is now fixed. The link to the venue (Razumosky palace, http://esec-fse.inf.ethz.ch/venue.html) was broken and is now fixed.

]]> Comment on Computer scientist gallery, updated by Bertrand Meyer http://bertrandmeyer.com/2012/11/12/computer-scientist-gallery-updated/comment-page-1/#comment-1416 Bertrand Meyer Sun, 09 Dec 2012 16:55:46 +0000 http://bertrandmeyer.com/?p=2877#comment-1416 Sorry, I saw your note only now. Thanks. I fixed the typo. Sorry, I saw your note only now. Thanks. I fixed the typo.

]]> Comment on Domain Theory: precedents by Bertrand Meyer's technology+ blog » Blog Archive » Loop invariants: the musical http://bertrandmeyer.com/2012/04/17/domain-theory-precedents/comment-page-1/#comment-1370 Bertrand Meyer's technology+ blog » Blog Archive » Loop invariants: the musical Wed, 05 Dec 2012 10:31:32 +0000 http://bertrandmeyer.com/?p=2408#comment-1370 [...] [3] Domain Theory: Precedents, article from this blog, 11 April 2012, available here [...] [...] [3] Domain Theory: Precedents, article from this blog, 11 April 2012, available here [...]

]]> Comment on Domain Theory: the forgotten step in program verification by Bertrand Meyer's technology+ blog » Blog Archive » Loop invariants: the musical http://bertrandmeyer.com/2012/04/11/domain-theory-the-forgotten-step-in-program-verification/comment-page-1/#comment-1369 Bertrand Meyer's technology+ blog » Blog Archive » Loop invariants: the musical Wed, 05 Dec 2012 10:29:24 +0000 http://bertrandmeyer.com/?p=2281#comment-1369 [...] [2] Domain Theory: the Forgotten Step in Program Verification, article from this blog, 11 April 2012, available here. [...] [...] [2] Domain Theory: the Forgotten Step in Program Verification, article from this blog, 11 April 2012, available here. [...]

]]> Comment on Computer scientist gallery, updated by Vince http://bertrandmeyer.com/2012/11/12/computer-scientist-gallery-updated/comment-page-1/#comment-1197 Vince Mon, 12 Nov 2012 22:17:35 +0000 http://bertrandmeyer.com/?p=2877#comment-1197 I forgot to mention. I believe the caption "Monical Lam" has an extra "L" in her first name. I forgot to mention. I believe the caption “Monical Lam” has an extra “L” in her first name.

]]> Comment on Technology plus by Vince http://bertrandmeyer.com/2012/11/04/technology-plus/comment-page-1/#comment-1196 Vince Mon, 12 Nov 2012 22:07:05 +0000 http://bertrandmeyer.com/?p=2850#comment-1196 I enjoy both kinds of articles. I come here for the 'domain theory' types of articles, but end up enjoying more the 'monument' type articles. I enjoy both kinds of articles. I come here for the ‘domain theory’ types of articles, but end up enjoying more the ‘monument’ type articles.

]]>