Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="delericho" data-source="post: 5505715" data-attributes="member: 22424">ThirdWizard has mostly covered it, but in addition to what he said, there is a question of pressure.Every time you fix a bug, there is a non-trivial chance that you'll introduce something new. Ideally, what you'd do is apply the fix, regression test the whole thing, and then release the fix (with decent, but never 100%, confidence that it works).If you release a buggy product, you suddenly have 45,000 subscribers all loudly complaining, all complaining about different things, and all demanding their particular fixes now now NOW!So, you try to accomodate them as best you can. You fix bugs at a rushed rate *, you cut corners in the testing, and all those additional bugs that you would have caught (and all those corner cases you would have found and also fixed), they all get missed.And suddenly, instead of having 100 bugs in the system, you now have 1,000. And the customers are still screaming, and still demanding fixes.* Of course, ideally, the coders wouldn't do this. It would be recognised as a false economy, they'd stick religiously to testing procedures, and all would be well. But this would be in the same ideal world where they aren't pressed to release buggy code in the first place.</blockquote>