undefined | Better HN

0 pointsdodobirdlord5y ago0 comments

Every software error? True. But essentially every software error, especially errors of significance? Untrue. The Space Shuttle control software was famous for its rigorous process control, and deliberately written in a language difficult to introduce bugs in. Over decades of development and 420,000 total lines of code, it appears that a total of 17 bugs ever made it into software used during a launch, with an average of about 1 bug at a time existing in the codebase. Processes to prevent errors from being introduced played a huge part in this, but the comprehensive verification and simulation process was also necessary to achieve such a low defect rate.

https://www.fastcompany.com/28121/they-write-right-stuff

0 comments

2 comments · 2 top-level

nradov5y ago

The NASA Manager’s Handbook for Software Development from 1990 is a great resource. We have better techniques for some areas now but most of it still holds up.

https://sw-eng.larc.nasa.gov/supporting-products/archive-of-...

ysavir5y ago

That's amazing work and dedication.

But I feel it fair to consider an organization like NASA as an exemption from the norm. This level of detailed error catching doesn't make sense for, say, a facebook clone startup.

That said, someone should send this comment to a Tesla engineer.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse