1 |
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- |
2 |
Hash: SHA256 |
3 |
|
4 |
On 02/18/14 17:56, Gevisz wrote: |
5 |
> On Mon, 17 Feb 2014 23:30:42 -0600 Canek Peláez Valdés |
6 |
> <caneko@×××××.com> wrote: |
7 |
> |
8 |
>> On Mon, Feb 17, 2014 at 8:05 PM, Gevisz <gevisz@×××××.com> |
9 |
>> wrote: [ snip ] |
10 |
>>> How can you be sure if something is "large enough" if, as you |
11 |
>>> say below, you do not care about probabilities? |
12 |
>> |
13 |
>> By writing correct code? |
14 |
> |
15 |
> No, by arguing that fixing bugs in a 200K line program is as easy |
16 |
> as fixing a bug in 20 10K line programs. It is just not true, just |
17 |
> the opposite. |
18 |
> |
19 |
>>>>> SysVinit code size is about 10 000 lines of code, OpenRC |
20 |
>>>>> contains about 13 000 lines, systemd — about 200 000 |
21 |
>>>>> lines. |
22 |
>>>> |
23 |
>>>> If you take into account the thousands of shell code that |
24 |
>>>> SysV and OpenRC need to fill the functionality of systemd, |
25 |
>>>> they use even more. |
26 |
>>>> |
27 |
>>>> Also, again, systemd have a lot of little binaries, many of |
28 |
>>>> them optional. The LOC of PID 1 is actually closer to SysV |
29 |
>>>> (although still bigger). |
30 |
>>>> |
31 |
>>>>> Even assuming systemd code is as mature as sysvinit or |
32 |
>>>>> openrc (though I doubt this) you can calculate |
33 |
>>>>> probabilities of segfaults yourself easily. |
34 |
>>>> |
35 |
>>>> I don't care about probabilities; |
36 |
>>> |
37 |
>>> If you do not care (= do not now anything) about probabilities |
38 |
>>> (and mathematics, in general), you just unable to understand |
39 |
>>> that debugging a program with 200K lines of code take |
40 |
>>> |
41 |
>>> 200000!/(10000!)^20 |
42 |
>>> |
43 |
>>> more time than debugging of 20 different programs with 10K |
44 |
>>> lines of code. You can try to calculate that number yourself |
45 |
>>> but I quite sure that if the latter can take, say, 20 days, the |
46 |
>>> former can take millions of years. |
47 |
>>> |
48 |
>>> It is all the probability! Or, to be more precise, |
49 |
>>> combinatorics. |
50 |
>> |
51 |
>> My PhD thesis (which I will defend in a few weeks) is in |
52 |
>> computer science, specifically computational geometry and |
53 |
>> combinatorics. |
54 |
> |
55 |
> It is even more shameful for you to not understand such a simple |
56 |
> facts from elementary probability theory (which is mostly based on |
57 |
> combinatorics). |
58 |
TBH I don't understand your estimate. Where did permutations come |
59 |
from? are you comparing all the different combinations of lines of code? |
60 |
|
61 |
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- |
62 |
Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux) |
63 |
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/ |
64 |
|
65 |
iQEcBAEBCAAGBQJTA6wWAAoJEK64IL1uI2ha5nIH/iUl2VNVAabzJzRJzC29zmWg |
66 |
t7KwGcfrtx2D40N7n4yM4LB7VBmnyoQ6+Iroh/uk3S33S/YK/5igN8UfuhvV+lvU |
67 |
85X3T3RE3oK3kURLq68bb4Ri2zLFQ8y1rQdrrUr9ABzy+F4Xfo+W4t+lLsHSQ+dY |
68 |
f4F7ByfJAHwh9OziFKh2/qwLj4z0Trv8AzZZhP8M29kTNWEWGyo5rGg8vRqm8Klm |
69 |
kHR3RvvTdV4AgYGHqxdtrO7qpB50VXZA8ihzl7lbmsBJj3pWBo1osFNWNP82yy7r |
70 |
s4hev5QrCpgOlEebtYi/noX8Vxx335SUirGCgjN/W9xhIwt3jfMqRes6zD+bi7A= |
71 |
=F5to |
72 |
-----END PGP SIGNATURE----- |