[a3voices]

It's possible to write software with very few bugs if you're very experienced in the language/framework and software development in general, writing all the code yourself, and perfectly understand the requirements. Otherwise, good luck.

[amelius]

Sometimes, writing bug-free code isn't even sufficient; sometimes, one needs proof that it is bug-free.

Then, your favorite language/framework will not help you much. You'll need strong verification tools, and a language and frameworks that are compatible with it.

[crpatino]

While I won't deny this point, I think the industry at large would benefit quite a lot if we were able to agree on how to write probably bug-free code, even if empirically.

Reality is that within a group of 10, you might as well get 12 or more prescriptions of how to write quality software. About half of those prescriptions will be useless and at least one will be actively harmful, but the team will have a hard time to reach a consensus and tell which is which.

Actually, the people most likely to tell which is the obviously harmful prescription learn pretty fast to keep their mouths shut, because they are more likely to alienate their peers than to convince them. So, everybody knows that thousand-lines-long functions are bad, but nobody can tell exactly why besides the bland, non-threatening "style" argument.

[AnimalMuppet]

It's even better if you're working with others who all are "very experienced in the language/framework and software development in general, and perfectly understand the requirements" - at least if you all communicate well with each other. Code reviews and people to bounce ideas off of reduce bugs, they don't add them.