净室软件工程
Cleanroom software engineering
Stacy J. Prowell、Carmen J. Trammell、Richard C. Linger、Jesse H. Poore · 初版 1999 年
2人推荐
4位读者提及
8次提及
Hacker News 上怎么说
正在加载完整评论……
Cleanroom software engineering
Stacy J. Prowell、Carmen J. Trammell、Richard C. Linger、Jesse H. Poore · 初版 1999 年
正在加载完整评论……
这玩意儿超出我的知识范围了，我说的对你来说可能是显而易见的废话，或者在 Haskell 里根本没用，但看你没明确提过，还是说一句：http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cleanroom_Software_Engineering http://www.amazon.com/Cleanroom-Software-Engineering-Technol...
This stuff is over my head, and I might be stating the obvious to you, or this might be useless for Haskell, but because you didn't mention it explicitly: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cleanroom_Software_Engineering http://www.amazon.com/Cleanroom-Software-Engineering-Technol...
……C 语言，好利用它的形式化验证工具。他们之所以频频被这些漏洞砸中，是因为他们用了一种更难分析的语言，外加某种徒增难度的编码策略。想看低缺陷率的开发策略，可以去了解下 Cleanroom Software Engineering 或者 Praxis 的 Correct-by-Construction。
…C to take advantage of its verification tooling. They're getting hit with these vulnerabilities because they using a harder-to-analyze language possibly with coding strategy that adds difficulty. See Cleanroom Software Engineering or Praxis's Correct-by-Construction for examples of low-defect, development strategy.
……通宵跑测试工具，这样你既能享受到工具的好处，又不用干瞪着屏幕。https://github.com/SoftSec-KAIST/Eclipser 另一个你可能会喜欢的轻量级形式化方法是 Cleanroom Software Engineering。它是最早把写软件搞得真正像做工程一样的方法之一。Stavely 的引言写得很棒。他的书也很好，其中讲半形式化验证的那一章既容易上手、ROI 又高……
…testing tools on it overnight, too, so you get their benefits without just staring at the screen. https://github.com/SoftSec-KAIST/Eclipser Another lightweight-ish, formal method you might like was Cleanroom Software Engineering. It was one of first to make writing software more like engineering it. Stavely's introduction is good. His book was, too, with the chapter on semi-formal verification being easier to use and high ROI…
…https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/013881483X/ref=ppx_yo_dt_b... https://archive.org/details/systemdesignfrom00mart/page/n3/m... 话说回来，如果你想要一套实用的方法，最出色的当属 Design by Contract、Cleanroom Software Engineering 以及 Praxis 的 Correct by Construction。Cleanroom 和 CbyC 能做到极低极低的缺陷率。而 DbyC 则非常务实地在开发效率、落地门槛和正确性之间找到了平衡。我觉得它们都……
…https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/013881483X/ref=ppx_yo_dt_b... https://archive.org/details/systemdesignfrom00mart/page/n3/m... Now, if you want a practical method, the best were Design by Contract, Cleanroom Software Engineering, and Praxis' Correct by Construction. Cleanroom and CbyC hit very, low, defect rates. DbyC was highly pragmatic in balancing developer productivity, ease of adoption, and correctness. I think they'd all…
……人，尤其是涉及到形式化验证或者排查未知问题的时候。但实际上，哪怕不用那些硬核玩意儿，光靠大家上点心、按你说的那些去做，就能轻松达成 90% 的效果。当然，Cleanroom Software Engineering 就做了很多你提到的事情，而且不需要像 Praxis 方法那样用那么多繁重的形式化推导。在这类讨论中，你应该牢记向对方指明：你推荐的方法以及这些……
…people, esp if it's formal verification or spotting unknowns. We can easily get 90% of the way there, though, without the hard stuff just by people giving a shit and doing stuff like you said. Of course, Cleanroom Software Engineering that does a lot of what you said without as much formal stuff as Praxis's method. Thing you should remember in these conversations is to point out to other party that what you recommend and what these…
……张口就来，说指望“普通软件”达到类似的质量根本不现实。我认为这种心态正是我们行业需要改变的。举个例子，我读过的所有关于 Cleanroom Software Engineering 的研究都表明，它的前期开发成本（无论是时间还是金钱）通常仅为“普通”软件开发流程的 2 到 3 倍以内（往往还要接近得多），而且虽然它并不能完全……
…automatically said that it wasn't realistic to expect similar quality from "normal software". That is the mindset that I think needs to change in our industry. For example, every study I've ever read about Cleanroom Software Engineering has shown that its up-front development costs (both time and money) are typically within a factor of 2 or 3 of a "normal" software development process (often much closer) and while it doesn't completely…