Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Technology Stocks : Novell (NOVL) dirt cheap, good buy? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Spartex who wrote (30376)	2/17/2000 12:54:00 AM
From: jwright	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 42771

Personally I don't know if I would be all that concerned with 63,000 bugs. For a project and code the size of W2K it seems reasonable to me. For your information Microsoft follows a convention of placing a comment line as follows in their code: // BUGBUG They do this so they can use a utility to grep the source code files to find them. Even though they say BUG they aren't. It typically means one of the following: 1) The code only handles the normal case and not any of the possible error cases. 2) They commented out some previous code and added new code to see if it works better. 3) They implemented something quick and dirty in a non-optimal manner. For example they might search for an item using a linked list linearly instead of taking the time to implement a hash table or b-tree. According to the article 27,000 were of the variety BUGBUG. All it means is that the developer thinks the code should be further examined at some point in the future. From my experience once the code is shipped and the developer moves on to the next project this code is rarely modified unless a BUG is really found in the code at some later point. Jimmy