[log in to unmask] wrote: >Speaking of horror stories of commercial code, i saw this today in >the news from the microsoft trial and laughed my ass off... > >"Felten, who examined the secret "source code" for Windows 98 under a >court order, said he had found 3,000 bugs marked by Microsoft >programmers in the portion of Windows 98 he had examined -- and he >had looked at only one-seventh of it." > >3000 bugs in 1/7th of the code! That was not a count of the bugs. That was a count of the bugs that Microsoft knew well enough to ascribe to a particular part of the source code, but decided not to fix. Certainly there are many good reasons for deciding not to fix a known bug, especially as the release date approaches. But 3000 of them in 1/7 of the code seems excessive.