Python reliability

[Ville Voipio]

In article <temdnYth4b2IhdbeRVn-jg at powergate.ca>, Peter Hansen wrote:

> Other than that, we had no real issues and definitely felt the choice of 
> Python was completely justified.  I have no hesitation recommending it, 
> other than to caution (as I believe Paul R did) that use of new features 
> is "dangerous" in that they won't have as wide usage and shouldn't 
> always be considered "proven" in long-term field use, by definition.

Thank you for this information. Of course, we try to be as conservative
as possible. The application fortunately allows for this, cyclic
references and new features can most probably be avoided.

> Also test heavily.  We were using test-driven development and had 
> effectively thousands of hours of run-time by the time the first system 
> shipped, so we had great confidence in it.

Yes, it is usually much nicer to debug the software in the quiet,
air-conditioned lab than somewhere in a jungle on the other side
of the globe with an extremely angry customer next to you...

- Ville

-- 
Ville Voipio, Dr.Tech., M.Sc. (EE)