
Engineering and Software Engineering (2010) [pdf] - tmcb
http://mcs.open.ac.uk/mj665/FoSEZurich2010.pdf
======
BasHamer
It is worth noting that the cost of correcting inaccurate software has gone
down.

Looking at the decision to adopt some defect prevention strategy in software.
Cost of strategy < ∑(perceived chance of a defect being prevented)*(cost of
the defect + cost of correcting the defect)

1968 vs 2018 Cost of strategy I doubt this changed much. For some strategies,
this changed a lot, like Buy vs Build where the cost to buy has gone to near
zero due to npm, NuGet, CPAN etc.

Cost of the defect I doubt the perception of this changed much, whether that
is accurate is up for debate. Software defects are prone to long tail events
that will have a disproportionate effect.

Cost of correcting the defect This went to engineers send on a plane with
physical media to some customers mainframe to floppies in the mail to
downloadable patch installers to asking the customer to patch from the
application to pushing code and letting automated build, deploy, test and
background updates. Compared to 1968 the cost went almost to zero.

Strategies have to be better or cheaper to be adopted vs 1968; because the
costs of defects have plummeted for many organizations. Unfortunately, the
author only references "cost" once in the 15 pages.

~~~
greydius
This is a valid observation; however, we also need to consider that we write
orders of magnitude more software in 2018 than we did in 1968. I don't think
the defect / LOC (or whatever metric you want to use) has decreased. So while
the cost per defect might be far lower, the total number of defects keeps
increasing. The mitigation strategies that I've seen reduce costs mainly
because they simply choose not to fix a lot of problems.

~~~
BasHamer
I prefer to look at value and costs.

To me LoC is an indicator of how much you'll spend on maintenance; less is
better.

I think that defects per unit of value have plummeted.

------
nichochar
The topic is fascinating, but I found this paper hard to read.

Could someone provide an extra clear ELI5 so I can re-read with that context
in mind?

------
tonyedgecombe
Is the author the Michael Jackson of _Jackson Structured Programming_ fame?

~~~
pjmorris
I believe so; the author affiliation is the same as that Michael Jackson, and
the paper references an earlier paper by that Michael Jackson.

------
hojjat12000
I didn't expect the paper to be a thriller!

~~~
lkrych
This author won't stop 'til he gets enough.

~~~
W0lf
Yes, but at least he wanna get started something

