🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <458@faatcrl.UUCP> jprad@faatcrl.UUCP (Jack Radigan) writes:
>jesup@cbmvax.commodore.com (Randell Jesup) writes:
>
>>	A note for all programmers out there: there is NO guarantee that
>>location 0 will be 0.  References to location 0 are bugs, and enforcer will
>>trap and report them.  Memmung stuffs a nasty value into location 0 to try
>>to break incorrect programs.
>
>Would've been nice if this was common knowledge *before* the 2091 hit the
>streets.  Alot of programs got bit by this problem, and more than a few
>were written by lawful coders too.

I hope you're saying that lawful coders can make mistakes.  We strive
to guarantee that if you program by the rules, then you will work.
We do not guarantee the reverse:  that if your program works, then we
endorse the "rules" you used.

There are many ways you can program incorrectly, often involving
false assumptions.  When possible and reasonable, we try to highlight
those assumptions as wrong.  Historically speaking, whenever a machine
appears for which some assumption is no longer true, some software
breaks.

When problems arise, we have been known to jump hoops inside the system
software because of some trick or mistake that used to work.  Other times
this is not practical, and we do work with developers to smooth out any
problems.

As well, we have developed a set of tools (Randell mentions some) that
can establish that your code will survive in a more hostile environment
than perhaps you and your testers might create.

Continued compatibility is a shared and vital goal for us and developers
alike.

>  -jack-

     Peter
--
     Peter Cherna, Software Engineer, Commodore-Amiga, Inc.
     {uunet|rutgers}!cbmvax!peter    peter@cbmvax.cbm.commodore.com
My opinions do not necessarily represent the opinions of my employer.
"Television is a medium because it is neither rare nor well-done."