On Jun 20, 12:06*pm, Steve Hix
wrote:
Well, assuming they are experts, each in their respective areas, they
would indeed know what to look for. *Also, peer-review (by other
experts) is a very good way to check structural integrity of software
(or any system).

You *really* don't know what is involved in developing verifiably
correct software systems, either in time or money.

It's *very* difficult and expensive.

Which is why so many researchers the world over spend time trying to
find mechanized approaches to proving that software is good, or that
it satisfies some definition of correctness, etc. Each of these
researchers seek what they regard as the holy grail of software
engineering - a machine that can help good engineers be better by
looking at what they make.

As far as FAA certification, if it turned out that verification were
prohibitively expensive (greater than $100US million), that would be a
problem.

In any case, because the material cost of software is $0, the cost of
verification would have to be very high indeed before a point would
reached, beyond which, it did not make sense to make the software
because the market could not support it.

-Le Chaud Lapin-