General > General Technical Chat

Average car contains 100 million lines of code, The State of Autosoftware

<< < (12/16) > >>

tom66:

--- Quote from: pcprogrammer on January 27, 2023, 06:49:48 am ---
--- Quote from: MrMobodies on January 27, 2023, 06:00:57 am ---I see that 1996 Corolla did have a key (as expected in that day and age) so I wonder why didn't he use it to turn it off or maybe it was so quick when it accelerated that he didn't have a chance despite pushing the breaks.

--- End quote ---

A lot of people freeze in an emergency situation and the only response is the foot on the break or no response at all. My response in car emergency situations is the handbrake, which I believe still to be fully mechanical on most cars. Might not do a lot when full throttle drive is on the wheels, but it did help us a while back when the wife responded a bit late on the highway and traffic in front was coming to a halt. As a passenger I tend stay alert and in driving mode  :-DD

--- End quote ---

See also: accelerator/brake confusion is common in automatic cars.  If a driver presses what they think is the brake and the car goes faster, an instinctive reaction might be to press the 'brake' harder.  In a panic, it's very easy to make a mistake, and not everyone thinks rationally.

David Hess:

--- Quote from: tom66 on January 27, 2023, 03:06:44 pm ---See also: accelerator/brake confusion is common in automatic cars.  If a driver presses what they think is the brake and the car goes faster, an instinctive reaction might be to press the 'brake' harder.  In a panic, it's very easy to make a mistake, and not everyone thinks rationally.
--- End quote ---

I have occasionally made that mistake after getting used to driving a manual.  I go to push in the clutch and my left foot catches the edge of the wide brake pedal.  The car brakes, which makes me think I have not pushed the clutch pedal in far enough, so I push harder, and harder, and come to a screeching stop.

tom66:

--- Quote from: David Hess on January 27, 2023, 11:04:35 pm ---
--- Quote from: tom66 on January 27, 2023, 03:06:44 pm ---See also: accelerator/brake confusion is common in automatic cars.  If a driver presses what they think is the brake and the car goes faster, an instinctive reaction might be to press the 'brake' harder.  In a panic, it's very easy to make a mistake, and not everyone thinks rationally.
--- End quote ---

I have occasionally made that mistake after getting used to driving a manual.  I go to push in the clutch and my left foot catches the edge of the wide brake pedal.  The car brakes, which makes me think I have not pushed the clutch pedal in far enough, so I push harder, and harder, and come to a screeching stop.

--- End quote ---

At least one advantage of a manual is there's an instinct to declutch and downshift to start slowing, so if you aren't slowing enough while pressing the 'brake', you might just go for the clutch by instinct. Also you need to be a lot more aware of your foot positions to drive a manual, as you use both feet, usually left foot for the clutch and right foot for brake and accelerator.  In an automatic you usually just rest your left foot.

I still like driving automatic, though.  I don't miss the clutch one bit, I know some drivers who say they love manuals, but I reckon a city drive in a good, modern automatic car (or electric/hybrid) would convince them otherwise.

SiliconWizard:

--- Quote from: Kjelt on January 27, 2023, 11:42:20 am ---
--- Quote from: SiliconWizard on January 26, 2023, 11:08:33 pm ---Oh yes, but it isn't really compatible with the agile methods in general, which have plagued the industry.
This is less obvious in heavily regulated fields (such as automotive, medical), but still has some impact at many places.
--- End quote ---
Depends on the way Agile is practiced but yes I have seen manager driven SAFe trains that were forced to deliver a lot fast and quality second. The whole SAFe basis is that the teams are enforced to say no esp. when quality is compromised. The teams should be empowered.
So I would say that esp. companies that claim they work SAFe but actually are doing management driven forced waterfall way of working are just bullsh*tting themselves. It is up to the teams to fight back or quit.

--- End quote ---

While some of the agile principles were defined by software developers a long time ago already, mostly to fight against bad management, it quickly turned against them and has been used as a management tool for at least a decade now - more like almost 15 years, I'd say.

As to teams fighting back, from what I've seen, it just doesn't happen.
And for the young developers out there, they don't know any better usually, so they don't even see the problem. Until they burn out, for some of them. The rest will take the cash and move on.

But methods are just means to an end. The end has been to provide increasingly complex systems, at an increasingly fast pace, for the lowest cost possible and at the expense of reliability.
And leaders have seen software as an enabler of all this, due to its apparent extreme flexibility.
Basic rules of physics still apply though. The more flexible something is and the less structure it has, and past a certain point, it will just collapse.

josuah:
That sounds like a case of making the unexpected even less likely -vs- correctly handling unexpected conditions:

My impression is pointing the programming language is relevant, but the spontaneous conclusion "replace the language" does not cover the full problem:

1. Non-software problems (power electronics, motor control algorithms in any language, ASIC design) have at least as many footguns as risky programming languages. Is there a Rust for Electrical Engineering, Rust for manufacturing?

2. The real solution might not be a language, but an architecture: having a failure (memory safety among many others) less likely to happen (i.e. through language safety) would not replace blocking the propagation of any failure. i.e. a hypervisor, watchdog timers, redundancy, or simply observing the possible affected parts. Although language safety might contribute in favor of this too

Some topical analogy would be saying that to take a passenger safely from point A to point B, more safety mechanisms help, but do not replace careful driving. :-)

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page

There was an error while thanking
Thanking...
Go to full version
Powered by SMFPacks Advanced Attachments Uploader Mod