|
Jeremy Falcon wrote: Or they don't understand something and will never speak up. Nobody wants to be that guy who says "dunno", so a lot just pretend to know when they don't.
Two answers to that:
- It is better to shut up and look stupid, that to open your mouth and confirm it.
and / versus
- It is better to ask and look stupid, but learn about it, than to not open your mouth and do the dumbest and most avoidable error confirming your lack of knowledge.
The art is to know when you are in which situation.  
M.D.V. 
If something has a solution... Why do we have to worry about?. If it has no solution... For what reason do we have to worry about?
Help me to understand what I'm saying, and I'll explain it better to you
Rating helpful answers is nice, but saying thanks can be even nicer.
|
|
|
|
|
That's no way to talk to an 80 y/o! 
"Go forth into the source" - Neal Morse
"Hope is contagious"
|
|
|
|
|
“if I want your opinion, I’ll ask for it”.
It gets better.
If I want your opinion, I’ll give it to you,😁
|
|
|
|
|
You would still complain if hit with a golden hammer.
|
|
|
|
|
Less than an hour after the Boeing/ULA rep made the (provably false) statement on live NASA TV that Starliner was riding on top of the most reliable rocket ever built, the launch was scrubbed due to an oxygen valve failure in the 2nd stage.
The slogan used to be "If it ain't Boeing, I ain't going". They lost this when they removed engineers from the C-Suite.
|
|
|
|
|
Nothing wrong here.
How many nasa launches were scrubbed because of a sensor glitch ?
CI/CD = Continuous Impediment/Continuous Despair
|
|
|
|
|
While I agree that the launch scrub was the right call, the disconnect between the ULA spokesperson's statement about the Atlas V being the most reliable launch system ever, the scrub, and the fact that SpaceX's Falcon 9 now has more successful launches and booster recoveries than Atlas V has launches just screams propaganda.
|
|
|
|
|
obermd wrote: the launch was scrubbed due to an oxygen valve failure in the 2nd stage
A lot more honest then say, Morton Thiokol.
"the debugger doesn't tell me anything because this code compiles just fine" - random QA comment
"Facebook is where you tell lies to your friends. Twitter is where you tell the truth to strangers." - chriselst
"I don't drink any more... then again, I don't drink any less." - Mike Mullikins uncle
|
|
|
|
|
Morton Thiokol told NASA not to launch the Challenger that day. NASA overruled them because President Reagan was visiting.
|
|
|
|
|
Morton Thiokol ultimately approved the launch, against engineers recommendations.
"the debugger doesn't tell me anything because this code compiles just fine" - random QA comment
"Facebook is where you tell lies to your friends. Twitter is where you tell the truth to strangers." - chriselst
"I don't drink any more... then again, I don't drink any less." - Mike Mullikins uncle
|
|
|
|
|
Morton Thiokol only approved the launch after NASA threatened to blacklist them for future contracts.
|
|
|
|
|
Agreed, it's a tough spot for them, nevertheless they bowed to the pressure.
"the debugger doesn't tell me anything because this code compiles just fine" - random QA comment
"Facebook is where you tell lies to your friends. Twitter is where you tell the truth to strangers." - chriselst
"I don't drink any more... then again, I don't drink any less." - Mike Mullikins uncle
|
|
|
|
|
|
obermd wrote: They lost this when they removed engineers from the C-Suite.
Entirely correct. Of the three major defense companies I worked for in the past, none still exist. The end was clear once the MBAs and other unqualified suits took over management from the engineers who successfully ran the companies for decades.
Will Rogers never met me.
|
|
|
|
|
Case in point:
the 3 top level people at SOuthwest airlines are all accountants. They gave out over $5 Billion US dollars in stock dividends. They ignore the 1908s' level tech running their IT operations. IT cost them fines and passengers back in 2022(?) when they cancelled thousand of flights do to issues with their IT. Their IT is admittedly underfunded.
Cegarman
document code? If it's not intuitive, you're in the wrong field
Welcome to my Chaos and Confusion!
|
|
|
|
|
Maybe any other rocket would've had at least two oxygen valve failures 
|
|
|
|
|
Perhaps, for the first time in this millennium, FORTRAN comes in the Top 10 TIOBE Index - TIOBE [^]
As a side note, my 'mother-tongue' is FORTRAN, being the first computer language i learnt in 1987.
Hope this news isn't a repeat.
|
|
|
|
|
The joy of fixed column coding.
|
|
|
|
|
Not to forget the now infamous GOTO, which was indeed a saviour in those days.
|
|
|
|
|
Amarnath S wrote: GOTO, which was indeed a saviour in those days
Not in 1987! Maybe it was true in 1967, although we had had Algol since 1960 (or 1958 for early blomers).
In 1968, we had the first major revision of Algol. Pascal arrived in 1970, Modula in 1975, C++ in 1985.
Dijkstra's "Go to statement considered harmful" is dated 1968.
If you considered GOTO 'a saviour' in 1987, you were either badly uninformed or extremely slow in adopting modern programming trends.
Religious freedom is the freedom to say that two plus two make five.
|
|
|
|
|
You will pry my gotos from my cold dead hands.
finite automata, FTW
Check out my IoT graphics library here:
https://honeythecodewitch.com/gfx
And my IoT UI/User Experience library here:
https://honeythecodewitch.com/uix
|
|
|
|
|
In 1987, I was in my pre-final year of Mechanical Engineering degree. Computers were new, having been introduced in India in early 80's, and programming was entirely new to me. Getting hands onto a computer was indeed rare, and somehow I got hands on a VAX VMS mainframe system. Compiling, linking, running - were all new. I had just learnt that there's something called as a 'file' - because the only files known were office files. And we were writing 'files' to implement the Newton Raphson method, the Regula Falsi method, etc.
Against this backdrop, GOTO was indeed a saviour, because what it did was indeed magic. And all my files were not more than 70 or 80 lines long, as it was college-level code.
|
|
|
|
|
It rather depends whether you are talking about the 'vanilla' GOTO statement. which exists, in some form, in most languages, and at least arguably has a limited number of valid uses, or Fortran's 'Computed GOTO', which I can only recall using once in my life as a Fortran programmer, and which is probably one of the most bug-prone programming constructs ever devised!
|
|
|
|
|
One of my Computer Science professors back in the late '80s had the memorable quote: "Be wary of anyone who refers to Fortran77 as 'the new Fortran'." 
|
|
|
|
|
During my student days, we wrote a spoof Fortran language proposal to add the COMEFROM statement to replace the much derrided GOTO
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
