Re:Think in Math, Write in Code
by 0x445442 on Thursday July 18, 2019 @09:56AM
(#20469793)
I'll bet the engineering process of the software written for the Apollo 11 lunar lander was much closer to the bridge building process than you might think. I'll also bet there's a whole host of software projects which use similar processes today. It's just that most of us writing DB skins for "The Enterprise" are rarely, if ever exposed to real engineering for the simple fact that quality software is expensive and typically, our organically grown solutions are good enough.
[ Parent
| on HN ]
> I'll bet the engineering process of the software written for the Apollo 11 lunar lander was much closer to the bridge building process than you might think.
Of course, but the Apollo 11 lunar lander was created without the aid of ubiquitous desktop computers. I imagine the SpaceX guidance/control software was written in a way that less resembles bridge-building/Apollo 11 lunar landers and more like the organic processes we see elsewhere in the software industry.
If Neo were to build a bridge in the Matrix, chances are his processes would bear little resemblance to those of the Army Corp of Engineers.
> I imagine the SpaceX guidance/control software was written in a way that less resembles bridge-building/Apollo 11 lunar landers and more like the organic processes we see elsewhere in the software industry.
For the guidance/control systems, I bet you're wrong.