| ??? 04/21/06 13:57 Modified: 04/21/06 14:00 Read: times |
#114675 - There's good reason Responding to: ???'s previous message |
Erik Malund said:
You've shifted the subject, as I said, from what I asked to what you think you'd do, in a set of circumstances unrelated to the question.
I know, the very instant I ask "why" you come out and state "You've shifted the subject". It's because it's already been stated WHY this is wanted, and your response has been, "Why would anyone be so silly as to want that?" That's not relevant. Erik Malund said:
This entire discussion, sometimes directly, sometimes by analogy, have been on the WHY make a LCD tester that test features that are not used.
Erik I've already explained, it's for completeness. If the LCD doesn't do one of the things it's supposed to do, it's BROKEN. What we want is to test the LCD, not just it's possible suitability for THIS assignment. If you can get by using broken parts, FINE. Most people can't. If your suppliers can dump their defective product on you, FINE. That's not what these students want, though. That's not what their instructor wants, and it's not what I want, as there's no telling what they'll want to do with their LCD's next time. They should be able to do whatever the HD44780 is supposed to do, though. The point is, that they can avoid buying defective merchandise by verifying that all functions work as specified. If they don't, they go back. These students are 19 - 20 year-olds with limited budget. If they spend the $3 for the LCD and $10 for transportation, in order to obtain these things, they should have the value for their money. All I asked was whether there'd been a test suite written. Haven't you noticed that, once you entered the discussion, nobody was interested in "getting in the middle?" RE |
