Return-path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) on chain.digitalkingdom.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.1 X-Spam-Personal-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) on chain.digitalkingdom.org Envelope-to: rlpowell@digitalkingdom.org Delivery-date: Fri, 17 Dec 2010 06:59:37 -0800 Received: from chain.digitalkingdom.org ([192.168.123.127]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1PTbm9-0002BA-Qt; Fri, 17 Dec 2010 06:59:18 -0800 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list jbovlaste); Fri, 17 Dec 2010 06:58:54 -0800 (PST) Received: from nobody by chain.digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1PTbll-0002AC-2k for jbovlaste-real@lojban.org; Fri, 17 Dec 2010 06:58:53 -0800 Received: from love.warhead.org.uk ([91.209.244.44] helo=fear.warhead.org.uk) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1PTblf-00023G-AS for jbovlaste@lojban.org; Fri, 17 Dec 2010 06:58:52 -0800 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by fear.warhead.org.uk (Postfix) with ESMTP id 789B763733 for ; Fri, 17 Dec 2010 14:58:45 +0000 (GMT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at warhead.org.uk Received: from fear.warhead.org.uk ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (fear.love.warhead.org.uk [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id 6UgG63F6Jmhq for ; Fri, 17 Dec 2010 14:58:44 +0000 (GMT) Received: from relay.warhead.org.uk (fear-int [192.168.3.1]) by fear.warhead.org.uk (Postfix) with ESMTP id DC520636FC for ; Fri, 17 Dec 2010 14:58:44 +0000 (GMT) Received: from [192.168.145.128] ([79.135.115.242]) by relay.warhead.org.uk with ESMTPA (msad) id alaric.0.1292597902.71; 2010-12-17 14:58:22.714352 X-Hashcash: 1:20:101217:jbovlaste@lojban.org::Ilgkgbhy:230523 Message-ID: <4D0B7A8D.5060708@snell-pym.org.uk> Date: Fri, 17 Dec 2010 14:58:21 +0000 From: Alaric Snell-Pym User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; NetBSD amd64; en-US; rv:1.9.1.9) Gecko/20100520 Lightning/1.0b2pre Shredder/3.0.4 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: jbovlaste@lojban.org Subject: [jbovlaste] Re: defining "debug" References: <20101217133000.GA32499@alice.local> <20101217142814.GC32499@alice.local> In-Reply-To: <20101217142814.GC32499@alice.local> X-Enigmail-Version: 1.0.1 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: jbovlaste-bounce@lojban.org Errors-to: jbovlaste-bounce@lojban.org X-original-sender: alaric@snell-pym.org.uk Precedence: bulk Reply-to: jbovlaste@lojban.org X-list: jbovlaste Content-Length: 572 Lines: 22 On 12/17/10 14:28, .alyn.post. wrote: > Is there a hint between these two at a more fundamental definition? > > If we have a reading fault finder and a computer program fault finder, > what is a fault finder? I think there's a worthy distinction between fault *finding*, fault *diagnosis*, and fault *fixing*; "debug" in computer circles tends to refer to the latter two, and either users or QA/testers get the first job :-) And all of these things can be specialised to computers with a bit of {sampla}. ABS -- Alaric Snell-Pym http://www.snell-pym.org.uk/alaric/