1.1 --- a/discussion.roff	Sun Jul 15 20:00:14 2012 +0200
     1.2 +++ b/discussion.roff	Sun Jul 15 21:57:51 2012 +0200
     1.3 @@ -602,6 +602,19 @@
     1.4  There is the cost of code complexity to be able to customize.
     1.5  There is the cost of less tested setups, because there are
     1.6  more possible setups and especially corner cases.
     1.7 +Steve Johnson confirms:
     1.8 +.[ [
     1.9 +eric raymond the art of unix programming
    1.10 +.], p. 233]
    1.11 +.QS
    1.12 +Unless it is done very carefully, the addition of an on/off
    1.13 +configuration option can lead to a need to double the amount of
    1.14 +testing. Since in practice one never does double the amount of testing,
    1.15 +the practical effect is to reduce the amount of testing that any
    1.16 +given configuration receives. Ten options leads to 1024 times as much
    1.17 +testing, and pretty soon you are talking real reliability problems.
    1.18 +.QE
    1.19 +.LP
    1.20  Additionally, there is the cost of choice itself.
    1.21  The code complexity directly affects the developers.
    1.22  Less tested code affects both users and developers.
    1.23 @@ -4074,7 +4087,6 @@
    1.24  .BP input/deps-mmh.eps .8i
    1.25  .EP
    1.26  
    1.27 -The figures display all program to source file relationships
    1.28 -that are not one-to-one,
    1.29 -i.e. all programs that are built from multiple source files.
    1.30 +The figures display all program to source file relationships where
    1.31 +programs (ellipses) are built from multiple source files (rectangles).
    1.32  The primary source file of each program is omited from the graph.