Didn't they test the software on a simulator? Obviously not.
-
-
-
The exact same software successfully flew the Ariane-4 a lot of times. What changed with the Ariane-5 was the thrust/weight ratio.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Actually they did a "full" (note the quotes) sim. What they didn't took into account, that on the simulator debugging behaved differently.
-
The only way this particular bug would have shown, would've been running the software on the real hardware with artificial sensor data.
- 1 more reply
New conversation -
-
-
I've always wondered what happened to: 1) the person who wrote that code 2) the person who reviewed that code 3) the project manager
-
The explosion wasn't caused by the overflow. It was a self destruct sequence, caused by mechanical failure, caused by the course correction.
- 1 more reply
New conversation -
-
-
But everybody still loves automatic type-casting and overloaded (arithmetic) operators, and start agonizing if forced to cast explicitly.
-
Those are paradigms that one does not follow when doing high reliability software. Heck, Ada does not have anything but explicit type casting, even if the types are identical representations (see custom types in Ada)
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
mucho mas actual esta el bug de la Schiaparelli... y no seré yo quien diga la empresa que estaba detras de ese bug, fiuuuu :-P
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
It would heve never happend had they checked the code on
@StackOverflow ... Someone would have spotted itThanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.