Re: [SystemSafety] Another unbelievable failure (file system overflow)

From: Matthew Squair < >
Date: Fri, 29 May 2015 16:13:50 +1000


An example of prospect theory?

Matthew Squair

MIEAust, CPEng
Mob: +61 488770655
Email; Mattsquair_at_xxxxxx
Web: http://criticaluncertainties.com

On 29 May 2015, at 7:43 am, Heath Raftery <heath.raftery_at_xxxxxx wrote:

On 28/05/2015 11:50 PM, Chris Hills wrote:

Static analysis isn't free. Testing isn't free.

Who determines the need for or business case for static analysis and test?

[CAH] normally (every report I have seen) static analysis saves a lot of

time and money.

The same is true of structured testing.

Funnily enough, the only experience I've had recommending static analysis is as the programmer to the manager. This is indeed the argument I use. A strange thing happens in business though (and perhaps my lack of comprehension explains why I'm the programmer and not the manager ;-) ) - capital costs and investment are worse than running costs. Buying and applying static analysis, even if it is cheaper in the long run, is always seen as less attractive than paying labour to deal with the consequences later.

Heath



The System Safety Mailing List
systemsafety_at_xxxxxx


The System Safety Mailing List
systemsafety_at_xxxxxx Received on Fri May 29 2015 - 08:14:01 CEST

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Tue Jun 04 2019 - 21:17:07 CEST