> The specs were derived from the code itself

Oh dear. I strongly suggest this author look specification up in a dictionary.

It's (what they're describing is) just reverse engineering. That's what reverse engineering is.

Fortunately reverse engineering too is in the dictionary - to help anyone mistaking it for spec generation.

	▲	6 hours ago \| parent \| next [-]
		[deleted]
	▲	6 hours ago \| parent \| prev \| next [-]
		[deleted]
	▲	perching_aix 5 hours ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		Implying that I did make such mistake, which I did not, unless you're willfully taking me overly literal. Nor did they make any mistakes when they described how they produced a specification, (and indeed, that it is a specification) despite your insinuation otherwise, for a similar reason. Maybe instead of pointing towards dictionaries, stop pretending that you lack reading comprehension, and get off of your high horse please.