Scully are you saying you would trust avionics programming that had no testing during and after production to ensure that no problems arise that would only show from being put through regular periodic use.
Flying is so much more exciting when I know the avionics software controlling the aircraft was put into production with my butt in the seat before testing was completed.
Just because there is no loss of life doesn't mean it's a good idea. There is always a cost. Not to mention we're misleading our customers and their customers to the point where no one trusts any software anymore.
@Blake, part of "agile" software development is "test based programming". Every function has a test case, which is run after after set of changes, not just when releasing. You seem to have some confusion over what is being "tested". One kind of testing ensures that the software does what the programmer intended - that happens with every build. But, equally important is testing whether the software does what the *customer* intended, and that can't happen without the customer actually using it. And even more important than what the customer *intended*, is what the customer *actually needs* - which is often only becomes apparent in practice.
Hahaha, now that you mention it:
The National Dutch Tax authoritity did *exactly* this last year when
rolling out a software program for sending company taxes to the government.
Testing showed that the software f*cked up the data so 700.000 companies had to
hand in their taxes again later.
Their "explanation" was that the late test phase was a remnant from the paper
times, when is was easier to fix screwups afterwards... (sic)