|
@ all re Margaret Hamilton
I discovered her and her work recently. Amazing woman whose engineering talent we should probably aspire to emulate where possible. Today, there's people trying to figure out how to eliminate interface errors, recovery properly, etc. which she invented and did successfully with 1960's hardware. Anyone interested can read this fascinating paper[^] on their work.
The fun part is that, by Richard Gabriel's classification, this crew stayed on The Right Thing throughout their work. Each problem was noted, understood, and mitigated with new methods/tech. They always tried to find the best approach to everything. They weren't afraid to throw away what wasn't good enough. They eventually developed methods to automate coding, testing and so on albeit with rigid modeling language. Here's what a NASA 2003 report said of the results:
"Her unique ideas included: using priority displays, establishing hard requirements on the engineering of all components and subsystems to eliminate interface errors with the flight software at the systems level, debugging all components and testing before assembly, and simulating every conceivable situation at the systems level before releasing the code. This made it possible to identify potential anomalies and resulted in ultra-reliable code. No software bug was ever found on any manned space flight Apollo mission. She demanded that the flight code be designed to work right the first time."
Great stuff. If I get enough time or funding, I plan to revitalize those efforts in a more usable way. She succeeded in semi-automating design and automating about everything else. There were performance and usability issues. I think, leveraging modern work, the best route to building on her work is to integrate a modeling language for arbitrary systems, a system-grade functional programming language (eg Habit from HASP project), powerful metaprogramming (eg Semantic Designs or Racket), and code generation (eg Esterel SCADE, Perfect Developer). This would let system be specified at a high level with safe, fast, low-level code generated through human directed, verified transformations. Being modular and functional, it could leverage any number of existing or future tools for static analysis, test generation, optimization, and so on.
What do you all think? Does this combination sound worth putting effort into? And clearly I'm talking about new projects rather than legacy applications.
Nick P
Security Engineer & Researcher
(High Assurance focus)
|
|
|
|
|
if you have on clean under shorts.
|
|
|
|
|
There is no "I" in "under shorts".
|
|
|
|
|
Create it... Create it...
The sh*t I complain about
It's like there ain't a cloud in the sky and it's raining out - Eminem
~! Firewall !~
|
|
|
|
|
Slacker007 wrote: if you have on clean under shorts.
Did you have an accident?
No, don't tell me.
What we got here is a failure to communicate
|
|
|
|
|
|
For starters, the flag is a big plus.
|
|
|
|
|
Swiss knives are multifunctional
Life's like a nose, you've got to get out of it whats in it!
|
|
|
|
|
Only the Army ones
If you have an important point to make, don't try to be subtle or clever. Use a pile driver. Hit the point once. Then come back and hit it again. Then hit it a third time - a tremendous whack.
--Winston Churchill
|
|
|
|
|
Don't wait for your coat...
veni bibi saltavi
|
|
|
|
|
What boat?
if(this.signature != "")
{
MessageBox.Show("This is my signature: " + Environment.NewLine + signature);
}
else
{
MessageBox.Show("404-Signature not found");
}
|
|
|
|
|
Don't gloat!
- I would love to change the world, but they won’t give me the source code.
|
|
|
|
|
The ones in the mountains.
|
|
|
|
|
I thought I recognized this.
|
|
|
|
|
Well they speak 4 languages
if(this.signature != "")
{
MessageBox.Show("This is my signature: " + Environment.NewLine + signature);
}
else
{
MessageBox.Show("404-Signature not found");
}
|
|
|
|
|
We have no sea side in Switzerland. Apart from that we have mountains, lakes, rivers... Chocolate, watches...
The signature is in building process.. Please wait...
|
|
|
|
|
You have chocolate watches? Awesome. Who needs an apple watch when you can have a chocolate watch?
|
|
|
|
|
Maybe he was referring to Android Wear having KitKat!
The sh*t I complain about
It's like there ain't a cloud in the sky and it's raining out - Eminem
~! Firewall !~
|
|
|
|