2 Nov
2010
2 Nov
'10
10:50 a.m.
On 1:59 PM, Patrick Horgan wrote:
On 11/01/2010 10:45 AM, Jim Bell wrote:
... elision by patrick >8 ... I don't insist that anything on the regression matrix must be called 'regression', but does an unexplained failure on the regression matrix deserve special attention? I think so, as unfair as that is when new platforms are added. It's something we *know should* work. That's a great definition of a regression, when you know that something should work, because it already worked, but somebody did something to it and now it doesn't.
(Not to include the other case where I know the code I wrote SHOULD work, but it doesn't and never has, because it does what I said instead of reading my mind.)
Patrick
Agreed.