Return-Path: <John.Harrison-request@cl.cam.ac.uk>
Delivery-Date: 
Received: from leopard.cs.byu.edu (no rfc931) by swan.cl.cam.ac.uk 
          with SMTP (PP-6.5) outside ac.uk; Fri, 2 Dec 1994 09:50:34 +0000
Received: by leopard.cs.byu.edu (1.38.193.4/16.2) id AA14007;
          Fri, 2 Dec 1994 02:36:22 -0700
Sender: info-hol-request@lal.cs.byu.edu
Errors-To: info-hol-request@lal.cs.byu.edu
Precedence: bulk
Received: from eagle.eng.warwick.ac.uk by leopard.cs.byu.edu 
          with SMTP (1.38.193.4/16.2) id AA13992;
          Fri, 2 Dec 1994 02:36:12 -0700
Received: from eng.warwick.ac.uk by eagle.eng.warwick.ac.uk with SMTP 
          id JAA12182; Fri, 2 Dec 1994 09:32:16 GMT
From: es774@eng.warwick.ac.uk
Message-Id: <886.9412020932@eng.warwick.ac.uk>
Subject: Re: FWD: NYTimes article on Pentium bug
To: John.Harrison@cl.cam.ac.uk (John Harrison)
Date: Fri, 2 Dec 94 9:32:15 GMT
Cc: info-hol@leopard.cs.byu.edu (info-hol)
In-Reply-To: <"swan.cl.cam.:297130:941129160419"@cl.cam.ac.uk>; from "John Harrison" at Nov 29, 94 4:04 pm
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.3 PL8]




> the error arose in transcription at some stage. Is that right? Perhaps I
> read too much into journalese. But if so, it may be that formal
> verification wouldn't have helped unless it was very tightly coupled with
> the production process.

> John.
>

Good to see somebody is using common sense.

Karim