"Manfred Nowak" <svv1999@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:c2g97i$f3q$1@digitaldaemon.com...
> Nope. If you have this opinion, then you should never take over a task which output might harm human life.
>
> > Looking at any program I use today ...
>
> I see. And I do not believe that you use programs for the control of transportation systems(railways, aeroplanes, rockets), atomic reactors, medic equipment (X-rays, artificial respiration), weapon systems, banking systems, store keeping, production robots, ... etc.

Just thought I'd take this opportunity to point out that the DMD license does not allow using DMD to develop applications which, if they fail, would cause significant harm or property damage. This doesn't apply to some other implementation of the D language, just the Digital Mars compiler.

I personally feel it is the total responsibility of the application developer of such apps to take on the liability for those apps, since those apps should be thoroughly tested, but lawyers being what they are, I felt it necessary to add such a clause.

Manfred Nowak wrote:

>I see. And I do not believe that you use programs for the control of
>transportation systems(railways, aeroplanes, rockets), atomic reactors,
>medic equipment (X-rays, artificial respiration), weapon systems, banking
>systems, store keeping, production robots, ... etc.
>
>So long.
>  
>
These apps should be tested thoughly, however it doesn't mean that there are no hidden bugs and history has proven that.  Your right in saying though that certain apps need to be fully tested as much is humanly possible but there are other apps that shouldn't be fully tested to such a level (it simply costs to much). That's not the point.

What about the mars landers. These had never been tried on mars before, although it was in the specifications.  There could have easily been software problems the technicians didn't account for, as have been with many other the other space missions.  The nasa team use one of the biggest budgets to test for these things.

I'm not saying it's not impossible to get a program correct to the specifications. I'm saying it's impossible to handle every possibility in the specification.  Moral, never assume a program is correct.

Anyway this conversation is getting a bit of topic.

--
-Anderson: http://badmama.com.au/~anderson/

J Anderson wrote:

[...]
> but there are other apps that shouldn't be fully tested to such a level
[...]

Also this is allowed to be incorporated into the specification.

> never been tried on mars before, although it was in the specifications.
[...]

You do not mean, that the specification was faulty in that way that it demanded a test on mars, do you?

> I'm not saying it's not impossible to get a program correct to the specifications.

Upps. Wrongly intertwined negatives?

> I'm saying it's impossible to handle every possibility in the specification.

The specification may even include a function over the time variable expressing an upper bound for the number of faulty code lines detected after being put into operation.

> Moral, never assume a program is correct.

True in a mathematical sense, but not in the sense of contracts.

So long.

Manfred Nowak wrote:

>True in a mathematical sense, but not in the sense of contracts.
>
>So long.
>  
>
Agreed.

-- 
-Anderson: http://badmama.com.au/~anderson/

Walter wrote:

[...]
> DMD license does not allow using DMD to develop applications which
[...]

Where is it? I have not detected it, when reading over the license some time ago, and even now, with your hint, I am unable to catch it.

If it is so hidden, then it is useless for you.

So long.

"Manfred Nowak" <svv1999@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:c2igta$1cko$1@digitaldaemon.com...
> Walter wrote:
>
> [...]
> > DMD license does not allow using DMD to develop applications which
> [...]
>
> Where is it? I have not detected it, when reading over the license some time ago, and even now, with your hint, I am unable to catch it.
>
> If it is so hidden, then it is useless for you.

\dmd\license.txt

Walter wrote:

> \dmd\license.txt

Upps. Sometimes even a red traffic light can be overseen.

So long.

Walter wrote:

> "Manfred Nowak" <svv1999@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:c2g97i$f3q$1@digitaldaemon.com...
> 
>>Nope. If you have this opinion, then you should never take over a task
>>which output might harm human life.
>>
>>
>>>Looking at any program I use today ...
>>
>>I see. And I do not believe that you use programs for the control of
>>transportation systems(railways, aeroplanes, rockets), atomic reactors,
>>medic equipment (X-rays, artificial respiration), weapon systems, banking
>>systems, store keeping, production robots, ... etc.
> 
> 
> Just thought I'd take this opportunity to point out that the DMD license
> does not allow using DMD to develop applications which, if they fail, would
> cause significant harm or property damage. This doesn't apply to some other
> implementation of the D language, just the Digital Mars compiler.

Will that license restriction remain?

> I personally feel it is the total responsibility of the application
> developer of such apps to take on the liability for those apps, since those
> apps should be thoroughly tested, but lawyers being what they are, I felt it
> necessary to add such a clause.

Liability isn't the issue, though. With that license restriction one would be doing something illegal merely to produce such a program using DMD. Presumably you couldn't be held liable if you merely included a disclaimer pointing out that you cannot guarantee that the compiler will produce software that is safe for use in a high-risk 'realtime' appliance, without making criminals of anyone who does. But then again, you do live in a ridiculous country.

Cheers,
Sigbjørn Lund Olsen

Sigbjørn Lund Olsen wrote:

[...]
> without making criminals of anyone who does.
[...]

Is it a criminal act in your country to not follow restrictions that are imposed on a product?

So long.

Manfred Nowak schrieb:

>>without making criminals of anyone who does.
> 
> [...]
> 
> Is it a criminal act in your country to not follow restrictions that are
> imposed on a product?

I would say the problem is, if someone breaks the license, the license is automatically terminated. That means: to use DM tools, you agree to the license. If you make some mission-critical software with it, the license terminates and you may not use DM tools AT ALL. Point. I cannot really say with my minor knowledge of right, what happens if you continue to use DM tools. I'm pretty much sure it cannot be considered a crime, but can be prosecuted civically, as long as and if at all Walter cares. I think making criminals is this sense is not that unusual. Example - copy protected "audio" CDs. I buy them, then i (illegally!) rip them to load them on my own personal MP3 player, and also copy them so that they would play without nasty clicks in my old Hi-Fi CD player. I'm pretty much sure it's illegal but legitimate, and i hope that no side would be interested in prosecution.

-eye