On Wed, Jun 9, 2010 at 7:27 AM, Simon Riggs <simon@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
...
> Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.
...
> A lack of bugs usually indicates there are no bugs in the areas being
> tested.
Would the real Simon Riggs please speak up? Isn't that precisely what
"absence of evidence is not evidence of absence" is meant to refute?
--
greg