Defining "firmware quality"

On Mar 11, 10:33=A0am, "Not Really Me"
<sc...@validatedQWERTYsoftware.XYZZY.com> wrote:
> djordj wrote:
> > I've read "The Non-Quality Revolution" by Jack Ganssle @ Embedde.com
> > (http://tinyurl.com/y9tspzl).
>
> > What about the concept of achieving higher levels of firmware quality?
> > How we can define it?
>
> > Number of bugs per LOC?
> > Perceived quality by the final user?
> > Or.... ?
>
> I think you mean bugs per KLOC, as in kilo or thousands of lines of code.
> Bugs per LOC indicates a complete lack of quality.
>
> As others here have indicated, quality is a rather subjective matter. =A0=
We
> work with firmware used in Safety-Critical applications, medical, avionic=
s,
> etc. =A0In these quality is defined more objectively in terms of software
> failures per hours of operation, or indirectly by the type of verificatio=
n
> and validation required by a given standard. =A0In both cases the measure=
ment
> is for a speicified safety level which range from not considered a safety
> concern to life critical.
>
> --
> Scott Nowell
> Validated Software
> Lafayette, CO
>
> __________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus signat=
ure database 4935 (20100311) __________
>
> The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.
>
> http://www.eset.com

Isn't that an oxymoron? Like military intelligence, sorry coundn't
resist.