Path: ...!feeds.phibee-telecom.net!weretis.net!feeder8.news.weretis.net!reader5.news.weretis.net!news.solani.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Jan Panteltje <alien@comet.invalid>
Newsgroups: sci.electronics.design
Subject: Re: another hint of quantum consciousness
Date: Tue, 17 Sep 2024 04:57:32 GMT
Message-ID: <vcb27s$988s$1@solani.org>
References: <vc4hd6$1ja6d$1@dont-email.me> <31kbejpg6dos3fdm81oq42a4rgcenu4lk1@4ax.com> <vc4tp1$21td$1@nnrp.usenet.blueworldhosting.com> <kaicejdhq0cudpivno5qmtes8al3tu8hje@4ax.com> <vc5k99$1fs5$1@nnrp.usenet.blueworldhosting.com> <pc1eej9v5j8i25qm38l4jffodn7eb4c2f6@4ax.com> <vc7500$11ms$1@nnrp.usenet.blueworldhosting.com> <0naeej138o8cftms0eve74d89v7gn89525@4ax.com> <vc7asd$131d$1@nnrp.usenet.blueworldhosting.com> <vc8pqn$2o26s$1@dont-email.me> <16igejdcnbt2c79g1357ushokss8pt2ugj@4ax.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; ISO-8859-15
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Tue, 17 Sep 2024 04:57:33 -0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: solani.org;
	logging-data="303388"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@news.solani.org"
User-Agent: NewsFleX-1.5.7.5 (Linux-5.15.32-v7l+)
Cancel-Lock: sha1:mEkGd7/muxzIgb1ZHUbjFRFUzmM=
X-User-ID: eJwFwQEBwCAMAzBLHVsLyAH2+pfwhKnQmyWqaFqbX3cPJ9rf6qmDg8pqseDIV7jLBq963A0u5Blvrtgh5w9dbBUr
X-Newsreader-location: NewsFleX-1.5.7.5 (c) 'LIGHTSPEED' off line news reader for the Linux platform
 NewsFleX homepage: http://www.panteltje.nl/panteltje/newsflex/ and ftp download ftp://sunsite.unc.edu/pub/linux/system/news/readers/ 
Bytes: 4469
Lines: 66

On a sunny day (Mon, 16 Sep 2024 08:14:49 -0700) it happened john larkin
<JL@gct.com> wrote in <16igejdcnbt2c79g1357ushokss8pt2ugj@4ax.com>:

>On Mon, 16 Sep 2024 01:21:41 -0700, Don Y
><blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> wrote:
>
>>On 9/15/2024 12:00 PM, Edward Rawde wrote:
>>> Maybe, but you're likely to find that they attract users who think it will make their lives easier.
>>> Maybe it will at some future time.
>>
>>Few "sizeable" projects are handled by single developers.
>>VCSs impose order on projects where multiple entities are
>>examining, correcting and modifying a single document store.
>>
>>This includes provisions to notify folks who happen to be
>>working with a particular "module" so they are alerted that
>>someone else has made a change to it; presumably this means
>>the "new" version now works better (more correctly) than the
>>version you might be using so its in your best interest to
>>see what's happened to the module before moving too far
>>down range.
>>
>>Of course, this only works when there is a discipline imposed on
>>the development team.  Many people don't like having to play by
>>"rules" so disdain anything that imposes same.
>>
>>I am tickled when a colleague discovers a problem or an improvement
>>to a piece of code or a bit of hardware as that saves *me* from
>>having to make the same discovery (or, worse, risk NOT making it!).
>>
>>It's also an excellent mechanism for rewinding the development
>>clock to determine where a particular problem crept into the
>>design.  (We had a problem some years ago when someone made
>>a presumably simple change to a FET used on one of the boards
>>that, later, presented problems.  "Why was this change made?
>>Is the problem because of the change or just brought to light
>>by it??")
>>
>>It's also a requirement for many structured design policies
>>(ISO9000, et al.)
>
>Software design is different from hardware. Software is less wrecked
>by having multiple simultaneous authors.
>
>Software is mostly verified by testing and iteration, and is usually
>shipped with lots of bugs anyhow. Software bugs are quickly fixable:
>hack the code and push out an update. Version 123.17.91b or something.
>
>Hardware takes a lot longer to revise and to implement updates in the
>field. Much more expensive too. So it's better to have one really good
>person be in charge and responsible.
>
>The difference is compounded by the trend of having armies of
>reasonably skilled programmers around, and precious few decent circuit
>designers.

At least in my case, with version update of code I wrote,
the new version has more features.
program-0.3 versus program-0.4
or have or support a different target, for example x86 or / and ARM.
Not so many bug fixes...
With hardware itself you may be stuck, but you can bring out a new model :-)
Same as with cars..