🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <BtnwwM.EBA@metaflow.com> rschnapp@metaflow.com (Russ Schnapp) writes:
>In article <veit.714837724@du9ds3>, veit@du9ds3.uni-duisburg.de (Holger Veit) writes:
>|> In <1992Aug25.183729.27815@venus.ic.cmc.ca> yooho@ursula.ic.cmc.ca (Yoo Ho Cho) writes:
>|> 
>|> >In article <l9ko46INNls@bashful.crhc.uiuc.edu> patel@bashful.crhc.uiuc.edu (Janak H. Patel) writes:
>|> >>I am annoyed at notes posted in this news group which have nothing to
>|> >>do with LSI or VLSI Testing.  It seems lots of news readers are
>|> >>interpreting "testing" to mean just about anything, except what
>|> >>this group was created for!  It seems they ignore the components "comp"
>|> >>and/or "lsi" while  interpreting "testing".
>|> 
>
>You know, the message traffic over the discussion of changing the name of the
>newsgroup has by far exceeded the actual garbage traffic I've seen here in
>the last couple of months.  Does the pain of the disease really justify the
>pain of the cure?  Is this a problem worth fixing?
>
I agree that the group could have a less ambiguous name, but we are
probably stuck with it, given the alternatives. Russ (and others) point
out the central issue: why don't we get any postings? Is the name of
this group the only testing issue left? Come on, Janak: you have lots of
good things going on at UIUC: how about some timely, controversial
postings from you and/or your group? Let's talk about the issues raised
by Don Allingham: why don't undergrad profs incorporate testing ideas in
their earliest classes? 

I'll throw a thought game onto the table: Suppose we had a
manufacturing line whose yield was 100%...  would we then not need to
test products? <Everyone cringes... of COURSE we would test, they cry!>
You could take the position that, in this ideal environment, what we
are actually doing through end-of-line testing was verifying the
function of the design; could we not do that through formal methods as
we designed the device? More generally speaking, how much of what we
call testing is actually a cover for lack of design verification?

Let's see if that stirs the pot....

JEH
-- 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Justin E. Harlow III		Office:	harlow@src.org
Vox:	919/541-9464		School: jharlow@egr.duke.edu
Fax: 	919/541-9450		Snail:	SRC, PO Box 12053, RTP, NC 27709