News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Deterministic Fully-Static Whole-Binary Translation Without Heuristics. Parent comment

Re:Deterministic Fully-Static Whole-Binary Translation Witho... by adrianN on Wednesday May 13, 2026 @04:26AM (#48119250)
Safety critical software is mostly a compliance dance that incidentally produces artifacts with lower defect rates than usual. LLMs can help with safety critical code as long as a human signs their name that they are responsible for its behavior.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Deterministic Fully-Static Whole-Binary Translation Witho... by junon on Wednesday May 13, 2026 @05:24AM (#48119641)
When I'm sitting in the plane that has CAS firmware, I'd like to think it wasn't written by an LLM and that my death in the case of a CAS failure isn't chalked up to "some engineer somewhere gets in trouble".
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Deterministic Fully-Static Whole-Binary Translation Witho... by adrianN on Wednesday May 13, 2026 @06:39AM (#48120173)
There probably already is generated code in there, only it was generated from UML. I don’t think that LLM generated code will be treated differently from the point of view of the relevant regulations.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Deterministic Fully-Static Whole-Binary Translation Witho... by junon on Wednesday May 13, 2026 @07:19AM (#48120476)
UML conversion is deterministic.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Deterministic Fully-Static Whole-Binary Translation Witho... by adrianN on Wednesday May 13, 2026 @11:54AM (#48123578)
That doesn’t matter. Once the code is generated it doesn’t change. The reviewed artifact in a safety critical codebase is the last abstraction layer before a fully certified compilation pipeline. So usually it’s not the UML but the generated code.
[ Parent | on HN ]