Comments by "Vitaly L" (@vitalyl1327) on "Continuous Delivery" channel.

@rentefald You most certainly can write game engines from scratch. If you believe you cannot, you must stay as far away from programming as possible, as you're a part of the problem of massive overengineering of pretty much everything.
1
really? Have you ever seen any proper dependently typed language?
1
@salvatoreshiggerino6810 Ada (SPARK) is what both pays well and got a really good type system. And projects tend to be far more exciting than the typical corporate stuff - automotive, aerospace, other kinds of high reliability embedded...
1
No. There was never any Java in Netscape. They just wanted to jump on a hype bandwagon, as Java was becoming popular in the corporate world.
1
The pre-winter AI definitely could fix it. You know - formal proofs, SMT solvers, etc. All the stuff modern so-called "engineers" who are likely nothing but some bootcamp "graduates" know nothing about and have no mathematical background to even start comprehending.
1
Nah. There are formal methods and well established design protocols that would have highlighted all such issues on a design stage. But the developers were incompetent and should have been flipping burgers instead of being anywhere close to any real world engineering.
1
@charlesd4572 there is nothing wrong with flipping burgers - it's a decent profession, and it is far more suitable for the self-taughts and bootcamp "graduates" than engineering. There were no unknown failure points in this system. Like, in every distributed system every link can go down. Obviously. "Engineers" who fail to use formal methods to evaluate all possible failure modes (based on known individual component failures) and their consequences are not engineers and should not be allowed to design anything at all. I've been building fault-tolerant systems for decades. It really hurts to see what abominations people build when they have no engineering background. Cache is indeed the wrong solution here - and using a WiFi for anything even mildly mission-critical is an outright crime. A fail-safe design would have had multiple communication channels and a quick way of detecting the issues with them.
1
@charlesd4572 there were no unknown failure points in this case. All were pretty obvious. Yet code monkeys failed to do anything at all with them. Do not try to find excuses - there is no excuse for doing such an awful job.
1
@charlesd4572 stop trying to find excuses for bad engineering. There is no excuse. They used wifi ffs, they clearly set for failure from the very beginning.
1
@charlesd4572 of course you can. There is an entire engineering discipline doing just that. Of course there are always unknown failure modes, but you can always design a system tolerant to all the failure modes you know about in advance. Have you seen aerospace and medical designs? Even automotive?
1
@martinjungmair705 software had a lot less bugs. A lot better usability. Was a lot more responsive than the current overbloated ill-designed software. And had all the features end users needed.
1
@martinjungmair705 of course there was a lot of crap software back then. Pretty much everything on PC was awful (and now is even more awful), with an exception for Borland products. I'm talking about the proper software (Unix, VMS) of that era. In particular, everything from Microsoft was absolutely awful, maybe with an exception for the first Windows NT release.
1
@ContinuousDelivery to add on the topic of continuous delivery of the embedded solutions - I found it very useful to have a simulated analogue hardware-in-the-loop. For example, for the aforementioned BLDC controller, we're using a patched ngspice version that supports mixed signal time step simulations, so we can run firmware in a loop with a simulated analogue part of the system (with even a load being simulated). Every change to firmware therefore runs through a set of tests, including breakdown scenarios that cannot be tested on a real hardware (well, they can, but only once).
1
 @almari3954 if you don't have any interrupts, and just poll all sensors in order, your FSM is always deterministic and allows a precise timing analysis.
1
@almari3954 if there are no interrupts, FSM is deterministic. There is no problem.with such "concurrency".
1
@pompiuses there's a caveat - Java is best performing only if you write it in such a way that GC does not have much to do. I had to deal with a few Java real-time GC implementations, it always boils down to writing in a very restricted subset of Java and continuously questioning - why the heck we did not just use C++? As for thoughput performance - yes, JRE is one of the best, and GCs available for it are very mature.
1
All the antivirus companies are just a security theatre and a scam. Microsoft should have never caved to them, AVs must be pushed out of the market.
1