Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.lang.java.programmer > #8740
| From | Leif Roar Moldskred <leifm@dimnakorr.com> |
|---|---|
| Subject | Re: Space probes was Re: in praise of type checking |
| Newsgroups | comp.lang.java.programmer |
| References | (2 earlier) <c7lu87lm24pmga3rul1am7s0oju6n26p75@4ax.com> <kftu87hmff3ubjti9t8eims2idhqn58l9o@4ax.com> <alpine.DEB.2.00.1110111908130.2814@urchin.earth.li> <7sudncbWtOTsrQjTnZ2dnUVZ876dnZ2d@telenor.com> <cfvb97ps3s09jfs0fhqdpckhcmnpairumu@4ax.com> |
| Message-ID | <9LqdnfdVAsdGkQvTnZ2dnUVZ876dnZ2d@telenor.com> (permalink) |
| Date | 2011-10-12 16:55 -0500 |
Gene Wirchenko <genew@ocis.net> wrote: > > AIUI, it had to do with a type conversion that lost precision. > Either the exception was not thrown or was not handled. (My sources > did not go into that detail.) Yes ... but not really. The error manifested as an arithmetic overflow exception in the hardware, but that is an immaterial detail. The _actual_ problem didn't have anything to do with exception handling or even with programming errors. What had happened was that that they took a piece of code that had been written for the Ariane 4 rocket -- and which was correct and without defects -- and put it onto the much larger and more powerful Ariane 5 rocket without considering if the code was fit for its new purpose and without testing the way the code interacted with the rest of the system. It was the wrong code, but there was nothing wrong _with_ the code: like a traffic cop trying to measure the speed of a passing car with a hair dryer -- there's nothing wrong _with_ the hair dryer, but the hair dryer is clearly the wrong choice. -- Leif Roar Moldskred
Back to comp.lang.java.programmer | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar
in praise of type checking Roedy Green <see_website@mindprod.com.invalid> - 2011-10-05 23:33 -0700
Re: in praise of type checking Lew <lewbloch@gmail.com> - 2011-10-06 06:43 -0700
Re: in praise of type checking Daniel Pitts <newsgroup.nospam@virtualinfinity.net> - 2011-10-06 09:52 -0700
Re: in praise of type checking Roedy Green <see_website@mindprod.com.invalid> - 2011-10-07 12:43 -0700
Re: in praise of type checking Gene Wirchenko <genew@ocis.net> - 2011-10-07 14:57 -0700
Re: in praise of type checking Eric Sosman <esosman@ieee-dot-org.invalid> - 2011-10-07 20:18 -0400
Re: in praise of type checking Robert Klemme <shortcutter@googlemail.com> - 2011-10-06 22:31 +0200
Re: in praise of type checking Roedy Green <see_website@mindprod.com.invalid> - 2011-10-07 12:36 -0700
Re: in praise of type checking Robert Klemme <shortcutter@googlemail.com> - 2011-10-08 16:05 +0200
Re: in praise of type checking Lew <lewbloch@gmail.com> - 2011-10-08 09:35 -0700
Re: in praise of type checking Robert Klemme <shortcutter@googlemail.com> - 2011-10-11 07:48 +0200
Re: in praise of type checking Gene Wirchenko <genew@ocis.net> - 2011-10-11 13:04 -0700
Re: in praise of type checking Arved Sandstrom <asandstrom3minus1@eastlink.ca> - 2011-10-11 17:52 -0300
Re: in praise of type checking Patricia Shanahan <pats@acm.org> - 2011-10-12 01:49 +0100
Re: in praise of type checking Gene Wirchenko <genew@ocis.net> - 2011-10-11 19:12 -0700
Re: in praise of type checking Lew <lewbloch@gmail.com> - 2011-10-11 19:10 -0700
Re: in praise of type checking Eric Sosman <esosman@ieee-dot-org.invalid> - 2011-10-06 20:29 -0400
Re: in praise of type checking Robert Klemme <shortcutter@googlemail.com> - 2011-10-06 23:56 -0700
Re: in praise of type checking Gunter Herrmann <notformail0106@earthlink.net> - 2011-10-07 13:57 -0400
Re: in praise of type checking Arved Sandstrom <asandstrom3minus1@eastlink.ca> - 2011-10-07 07:19 -0300
Re: in praise of type checking Roedy Green <see_website@mindprod.com.invalid> - 2011-10-07 12:39 -0700
Re: in praise of type checking Gene Wirchenko <genew@ocis.net> - 2011-10-07 15:03 -0700
Space probes was Re: in praise of type checking Tom Anderson <twic@urchin.earth.li> - 2011-10-11 19:26 +0100
Re: Space probes was Re: in praise of type checking Leif Roar Moldskred <leifm@dimnakorr.com> - 2011-10-12 01:15 -0500
Re: Space probes was Re: in praise of type checking Travers Naran <tnaran@gmail.com> - 2011-10-12 07:23 -0700
Re: Space probes was Re: in praise of type checking Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2011-10-12 20:04 +0000
Re: Space probes was Re: in praise of type checking Gene Wirchenko <genew@ocis.net> - 2011-10-12 13:53 -0700
Re: Space probes was Re: in praise of type checking Leif Roar Moldskred <leifm@dimnakorr.com> - 2011-10-12 16:55 -0500
Re: Space probes was Re: in praise of type checking Gene Wirchenko <genew@ocis.net> - 2011-10-12 15:02 -0700
Re: Space probes was Re: in praise of type checking Leif Roar Moldskred <leifm@dimnakorr.com> - 2011-10-13 00:08 -0500
Re: Space probes was Re: in praise of type checking Arved Sandstrom <asandstrom3minus1@eastlink.ca> - 2011-10-13 07:48 -0300
Re: Space probes was Re: in praise of type checking "John B. Matthews" <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2011-10-14 07:09 -0400
Re: Space probes was Re: in praise of type checking Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2011-10-12 22:03 +0000
Re: Space probes was Re: in praise of type checking Tom Anderson <twic@urchin.earth.li> - 2011-10-14 14:14 +0100
Re: in praise of type checking RedGrittyBrick <RedGrittyBrick@spamweary.invalid> - 2011-10-07 11:50 +0100
Re: in praise of [loosey goosey] type checking) RedGrittyBrick <RedGrittyBrick@spamweary.invalid> - 2011-10-07 12:20 +0100
Re: in praise of type checking Andreas Leitgeb <avl@gamma.logic.tuwien.ac.at> - 2011-10-07 14:00 +0000
csiph-web