Re: Would You Fly an Airplane with a Linux-Based Control System?

[Martin Krischik <martin@krischik.com>]

Marius Amado Alves wrote:

> Rod Haper wrote:
>> The "bug" that got "fixed" was the specification.  That in turn
>> necessitated a change to the software to comply with the updated
>> specification.  The "error" was in the old Ariane IV's specification's
>> lack of applicability to the new Ariane V's requirements.  The "failure"
>> was one of design, not software implementation, and was independent of
>> what language was or might have been used for the implementation.
>> 
>> What is your point vis-a-vis hardware or software?  The "conclusion" I
>> draw is that you seem to be hung up on some agenda which ignores the
>> simple facts of the case.
 
> My agenda is to make sure things are called by their names with no
> guilt. A bug is a bug is a bug. A specification is a software item. A
> defect in a specification is a bug. I got the impression the text that
> was being cooked up for the FAQs (wikibooks?) was avoiding admitting
> that the error was on the software part and trying to blame the
> hardware. An Ada bias forging a falsity. That had to be stopped. Sorry
> if I misunderstood.

But the specification was for a rocked with "vertical lift off" and the
Ariane 5 - like the Space Shuttle - is a "tilted lift off".

Who is to blame when one uses fiat punto tires for a max vel. of 180km/h on
a ferrari with max vel. of 280km/h and all 4 tires explode at 240 km/h? The
tires? The car? Or the person who choose to combine them?

With Regards

Martin

-- 
mailto://krischik@users.sourceforge.net
http://www.ada.krischik.com