From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 101deb,885dab3998d28a4 X-Google-Attributes: gid101deb,public X-Google-Thread: 107079,eca28648989efca9 X-Google-Attributes: gid107079,public X-Google-Thread: 103376,885dab3998d28a4 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-Thread: f74ae,eca28648989efca9 X-Google-Attributes: gidf74ae,public From: rav@goanna.cs.rmit.edu.au (@@ robin) Subject: Re: Ariane 5 failure Date: 1996/10/04 Message-ID: <532352$19u@goanna.cs.rmit.edu.au>#1/1 X-Deja-AN: 187118054 distribution: inet references: <52a572$9kk@goanna.cs.rmit.edu.au> <52bm1c$gvn@rational.rational.com> <1780E8471.KUNNE@frcpn11.in2p3.fr> <1780FB1E3.KUNNE@frcpn11.in2p3.fr> <324CC40B.277E21B4@vwis.com> organization: Comp Sci, RMIT, Melbourne, Australia newsgroups: sci.astro,sci.math.num-analysis,comp.lang.pl1,comp.lang.ada nntp-posting-user: rav Date: 1996-10-04T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: Lawrence Foard writes: >Ronald Kunne wrote: >> Actually, this was the case here: the code was taken from an Ariane 4 >> code where it was physically impossible that the index would go out >> of range: a test would have been a waste of time. ---A test for overflow in a system that aborts if unexpected overflow occurs, is never a waste of time. Recall Murphy's Law: "If anything can go wrong, it will." Then there's Robert's Law: "Even if it can't go wrong, it will." >> Unfortunately this was no longer the case in the Ariane 5. >Actually it would still present a danger on Ariane 4. If the sensor >which apparently was no longer needed during flight became defective, >then you could get a value out of range. ---Good point Lawrence.