![]() ![]() He then calls the tester to show him what he did step by step. The programmer tests the module but is unable to find out what manipulations the tester did in order to the bug to occur. The tester tells the programmer that there is a bug on the X module. In this context, it is more like mimics, trying to be as close as possible to the original action. When asked from the police, the witness may for example replicate the gestures of the murderer to describe how the scene went. The noun replicate was already stated by previous answers, but now, let's consider the verb to replicateĬonsider a crime scene witnessed by someone. In addition to the answers above, I would add that a duplicate mostly apply to objects, like an ID card duplicate in case of loss or damage, a line in a source code, a photocopy of a document. Incorrect, but nevertheless sometimes used. ![]() However, in an entirely different example: if it is found that two people are performing the exact same task and the repetition of work is unnecessary, this is referred to as a duplication of work irregardless of whether the two are strictly following the same process, so there are clearly exceptions.įinally, although the correct English terms for the results of duplication and replication would be duplicate and replica, it is not uncommon in colloquial speech to hear them referred to by their processes. The second programmer may use an entirely different method to achieve the same result. However if is important to note that while the processes of duplication and replication may be different, the end result from both can still be identical.Ī computer programmer codes some software that produces a result.Īnother programmer is asked to replicate that software. Previous answers refer to the end result to determine which process has been followed (replication or duplication) ie that a duplicate is normally an exact copy of an original (such as a photocopy of a paper) whereas a replica is not necessarily to the exact specifications or dimensions. It should be noted that replication and duplication technically refer to processes, not any result or object that results from such processes. This means that a duplicate of something is as good as the original and can be used to replace it completely while this is usually not true for replicates. If you make a duplicate of the keys to your house, the duplicate is going to be absolutely identical to the original keys in all respects. So, the idea behind replication is that the replicate is always slightly different from the original at least in terms of its identity.Īs for the other term, the result of the process of duplication is a duplicate which is an identical copy of the original in all of its aspects. Even though the two paintings look exactly the same, we all agree that there is still a big difference between the two paintings! The original costs millions of dollars because it's the original work of Leonardo da Vinci and the replica is just a mere copy of it. A professional painter can make an exact replica of the Mona Lisa. But the most important difference between the two is their identity-the original and its copy are not going to be the same thing at least in terms of their identity! An example that illustrates this best would be a replica of a famous painting. The original and its copy can have different sizes, for example. There is usually some sort of difference between the original and the replicate. When you replicate something, you get a copy that's almost the same as the original, but not quite the same. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |