[SystemSafety] C for OSs

Mon Oct 14 16:33:18 CEST 2019

Hi Alvery

Re “I do feel there is a certain amount of wilful misinterpretation going on here. The agile manifesto has its place. Its place is where the application is non-critical and human-focussed.”

The project I was discussing is a large critical system that is embedded.  It may have a VERY simple screen and some buttons but the majority of the, somewhat complex, system is not human facing.  Not only is it a large system its development team is in the 10’s  as well. 

Chris 

From: systemsafety [mailto:systemsafety-bounces at lists.techfak.uni-bielefeld.de] On Behalf Of Grazebrook, Alvery AN
Sent: Monday, October 14, 2019 9:36 AM
To: systemsafety at lists.techfak.uni-bielefeld.de
Subject: Re: [SystemSafety] C for OSs

I do feel there is a certain amount of wilful misinterpretation going on here. The agile manifesto has its place. Its place is where the application is non-critical and human-focussed. The classic problem here is that the users have expressed some need, but not all the other relationships and business processes connected to that need. The project is going through a discovery process, by implementing a partial solution the team (developers and customers) the developers and customers together discover ways to improve the process through the use of computer automation. The intermediate deliverables help to identify the unexplored relationships that exist in the process. If you are trying to chase something had to define like “a good customer experience”, this approach can be valuable

Even for safety-related equipment control applications, this kind of process has some potential during the R&T stages. Clearly, when working towards the final product, a good deal more discipline is required. 

Regards,

            Alvery

** Opinions expressed here are my own, not necessarily those of my employer. **

From: systemsafety [mailto:systemsafety-bounces at lists.techfak.uni-bielefeld.de] On Behalf Of Martyn Thomas
Sent: 11 October 2019 14:25
To: systemsafety at lists.techfak.uni-bielefeld.de
Subject: Re: [SystemSafety] C for OSs

There must be a line missing from the agile manifesto: "gettong to market over getting it right"

Martyn

On 11/10/2019 13:41, Andrew Banks wrote:

Since you’ve raised that:

                Customer collaboration over contract negotiation

Good luck with that, in the real world J

Ultimately, someone has to pay…

From: systemsafety [mailto:systemsafety-bounces at lists.techfak.uni-bielefeld.de] On Behalf Of Chris Hills
Sent: 03 October 2019 17:52
To: 'SPRIGGS, John J'; 'Steve Tockey'; 'Olwen Morgan'; systemsafety at lists.techfak.uni-bielefeld.de
Subject: Re: [SystemSafety] C for OSs

John

You are an antediluvian  I refer you to the Agile Manifesto https://agilemanifesto.org/

Individuals and interactions over processes and tools
Working software over comprehensive documentation
Customer collaboration over contract negotiation
Responding to change over following a plan

That is, while there is value in the items on
the right, we value the items on the left more.

Now you are re-educated and can see the light!

What could possibly go wrong?

J

Regards

   Chris 

Phaedrus Systems Ltd         

FREEphone 0808 1800 358    International +44 1827 259 546
Vat GB860621831  Co Reg #04120771
Http://www.phaedsys.com <http://www.phaedsys.com/>   chills at phaedsys.com 

From: SPRIGGS, John J [mailto:John.SPRIGGS at nats.co.uk] 
Sent: Thursday, October 3, 2019 10:23 AM
To: safetyyork at phaedsys.com; 'Steve Tockey'; 'Olwen Morgan'; systemsafety at lists.techfak.uni-bielefeld.de
Subject: RE: [SystemSafety] C for OSs

My favourite comment, from several years ago, when I pointed out some errors in a document, I was told “This is an agile project, we do not have time to change anything”  

I also despair.

John

From: systemsafety  <mailto:systemsafety-bounces at lists.techfak.uni-bielefeld.de> <systemsafety-bounces at lists.techfak.uni-bielefeld.de> On Behalf Of Chris Hills
Sent: 03 October 2019 09:55
To: 'Steve Tockey'  <mailto:steve.tockey at construx.com> <steve.tockey at construx.com>; 'Olwen Morgan'  <mailto:olwen at phaedsys.com> <olwen at phaedsys.com>; systemsafety at lists.techfak.uni-bielefeld.de
Subject: Re: [SystemSafety] C for OSs

Steve,

That’s the problem with dinosaurs like you wanting: Set theory, Requirements , Design, Code quality, Peer review, Development processes, Computer architecture and Engineering economics.....

We use Agile so we don't need: Set theory, Requirements , Design, Development processes.
We use lots of Open Source so it is all Peer Reviewed before we get it.
We use continuous integration to get Code quality, when it compiles with no errors it's OK because our compiler has built in error checking. 

Engineering economics has nothing to do with coding/software! That is management ******** and techies don't need to know it......

I have had all those comments said to me one way or another, more than once, in the last 1-2 years by people developing critical systems. So far mission and company critical. Some with consumer/commercial security implications but none so far on serious safety critical systems. So people/companies might lose money but not their lives

That includes being told I am "a dinosaur" because: "Everyone now uses dev-ops with scrum for critical systems development these days.... " 

I despair.

Seriously there does seem to be a huge disconnect between a lot of people "doing software" especially IoT and the [safety/security] critical systems people. I daily come across developers who have never heard of most of the things discussed in this group. How do we make the re-connect?

Regards
Chris 

Phaedrus Systems Ltd 
FREEphone 0808 1800 358 International +44 1827 259 546
Vat GB860621831 Co Reg #04120771
Http://www.phaedsys.com chills at phaedsys.com 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Steve Tockey [mailto:steve.tockey at construx.com]
> Sent: Monday, September 23, 2019 5:09 PM
> To: safetyyork at phaedsys.com; 'Olwen Morgan';
> systemsafety at lists.techfak.uni-bielefeld.de
> Subject: Re: [SystemSafety] C for OSs
> 
> 
> Chris Hills wrote:
> 
> “What has made it far worse is "coding" being pushed as a skill, at least
> in the UK.”
> 
> 
> Same here in the US, and from my travels I can say it's the same all the
> way around the world. For example, this article from just last week:
> 
> https://mashable.com/shopping/sept-18-computer-science-master-class/
> 
> 
> Quote from the article:
> 
> “Learn the ropes of computer science with this master class bundle — just
> $39 for full access to tons of courses that'll make you a pro in no time.”
> 
> “Not only are jobs aplenty in the computer science field, but they also
> come with a pretty paycheck – over $91K a year, on average.”
> 
> “. . . this Computer Science Master Class Bundle will give you a complete
> computer science education without the massive loans.”
> 
> 
> Course content is said to include:
> 
> * C#, JavaScript, Java, Scala, Google Go, Python 3, PHP MySQL
> * The Arduino IoT cloud platform
> * Software testing technologies: Sikuli, Selenium, Junit
> * Building apps with Alexa
> * Technical fundamentals and interview tips
> 
> 
> 
> The Technical Fundamentals course had a hint of promise, but looking at
> the course outline shows otherwise:
> 
> * Introduction
> * Pointer and Arrays
> * Strings are just pointers at heart
> * Linked lists can be fun!
> * Bit Manipulation
> * General programming problems - practice makes perfect
> * Big-O Notation, Sorting And Searching Algorithms
> * Recursion and the recursive sense
> * Stacks And Queues
> * Binary Trees
> * Binary Search Trees
> * Binary Tree Problems
> 
> 
> Discrete math? No
> 
> Set theory? No
> Requirements? No
> Design? No
> Code quality? No
> Peer review? No
> Development processes? No
> Computer architecture? No
> Engineering economics? No
> 
> The list of critical but missing content goes on and on.
> 
> 
> 
> Chris Hills finished with, “It’s depressing.”
> 
> Yes. Without a doubt. . .
> 
> 
> — steve
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Chris Hills <safetyyork at phaedsys.com>
> Organization: Phaedrus Systems
> Reply-To: "safetyyork at phaedsys.com" <safetyyork at phaedsys.com>
> Date: Saturday, September 21, 2019 at 4:12 AM
> To: Steve Tockey <Steve.Tockey at construx.com>, 'Olwen Morgan'
> <olwen at phaedsys.com>, "systemsafety at lists.techfak.uni-bielefeld.de"
> <systemsafety at lists.techfak.uni-bielefeld.de>
> Subject: RE: [SystemSafety] C for OSs
> 
> 
> The big problem is people start writing code long before the
> specification, let alone the design is finished.
> Hence the rise in Agile methods as they give the illusion of progress. Ie
> people are writing code so much faster than with waterfall....
> Waterfall or V model require a discipline that is also lacking in software
> development these days.
> 
> What has made it far worse is "coding" being pushed as a skill, at least
> in the UK.
> We have gone from Software Engineering to Programming to Coding.
> What is pushed in "coding" is that you start developing an app by coding,
> not by doing a detailed (any?) design.
> Trial and error is pushed as a solution.
> 
> So doing an "app" that is "something like that" will require fuzzy logic
> and imaginary numbers (and I don't mean i notation). To do any form of
> mathematical or formal methods on most project is a non-starter. Even
> without the reality that maths isn't part of many software degrees so you
> probably won't have the skills in any team to do it..
> 
> What is worse is much of the IoT and Infotainment is written to low
> standards but is being bolted on to critical systems. As we get an
> increasingly connected world containing more and more software the quality
> of the software is plummeting.
> 
> It’s depressing.
> 
> 
> Regards
> Chris
> 
> Phaedrus Systems Ltd
> FREEphone 0808 1800 358 International +44 1827 259 546
> Vat GB860621831 Co Reg #04120771
> Http://www.phaedsys.com chills at phaedsys.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: systemsafety [mailto:systemsafety-bounces at lists.techfak.uni-
> > bielefeld.de] On Behalf Of Steve Tockey
> > Sent: Wednesday, September 18, 2019 8:29 PM
> > To: Olwen Morgan; systemsafety at lists.techfak.uni-bielefeld.de
> > Subject: Re: [SystemSafety] C for OSs
> >
> >
> > Olwen wrote: ³I remember reading a report of a talk given by Tony Hoare
> >in
> > which he counselled solving computing problems in mathematics and only
> > then translating the mathematics into program code. I thought that was
> > such blindingly self-evident good practice that I wondered why he saw fit
> > to say it explicitly.²
> >
> > I saw a similar quote but haven¹t been able to track down the source:
> >
> > ³Š change the nature of programming from a private, puzzle solving
> > activity to a public, mathematics based activity of translating
> > specifications into programs Š that can be expected to both run and do
> >the
> > right thing with little or no debugging²
> >
> >
> > Sounds like it could be from Tony Hoare.
> >
> > Anyway, I am constantly amazed by how many people resist such an
> >obviously
> > good idea.
> >
> >
> > ‹ steve
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Olwen Morgan <olwen at phaedsys.com>
> > Date: Tuesday, September 17, 2019 at 12:47 PM
> > To: Steve Tockey <Steve.Tockey at construx.com>,
> > "systemsafety at lists.techfak.uni-bielefeld.de"
> > <systemsafety at lists.techfak.uni-bielefeld.de>
> > Subject: Re: [SystemSafety] C for OSs
> >
> >
> > On 16/09/2019 23:15, Steve Tockey wrote:
> > >
> > > All true engineers need to have a solid foundation in:
> > >
> > > *) relevant Scientific & Mathematical Theory
> > > *) useful and relevant Practice
> > > *) Engineering Economy
> > >
> > > Take, for example, a Chemical Engineer. The scientific and
> > > mathematical theory is Chemistry, Physics, and to some extent Quantum
> > > Mechanics. The relevant practice are things like waste heat removal
> > > strategies, pressure vessels, catalysts, etc. The theory and practice
> > > combine to help the true engineer propose a set of theoretically
> > > viable, potential solutions to a real-world problem. Engineering
> > > economy comes in to guide the true engineer in identifying the most
> > > cost-effective one of those theoretically viable, potential solutions.
> > > As a consultant friend of mine once said (slightly paraphrased), ³The
> > > Theory and the Practice sets Œem up, Economics knocks Œem down².
> >
> > Of course, I go along with this. But I learned to teach myself long
> > before there was anything formally titled a body of knowledge. For
> > example, I left school knowing how to do critical path analysis, so the
> > technical aspects of project management were, for me, a matter of
> > applying something that I already understood. It was the same with
> > software testing. I taught myself graph theory in my mid-twenties and
> > had no problem understanding graph-based test metrics when I later
> > encountered them.
> >
> > Indeed, in the late seventies, when I was around 25, I remember reading
> > a report of a talk given by Tony Hoare in which he counselled solving
> > computing problems in mathematics and only then translating the
> > mathematics into program code. I thought that was such blindingly
> > self-evident good practice that I wondered why he saw fit to say it
> > explicitly. And it has often irritated me to find that one needed to do
> > an approved course in something to be seen as competent in things that I
> > regarded as obvious.
> >
> > On the other hand, having had the benefit of a privileged public-school
> > education (which was truly exceptional in mathematics), I found myself
> > pretty intellectually self-reliant as soon as I started working in the
> > computing industry. So, I'll admit it, I have to confess to blank
> > incomprehension of people who have never felt themselves to be in that
> > position.
> >
> >
> > Olwen
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > The System Safety Mailing List
> > systemsafety at TechFak.Uni-Bielefeld.DE
> > Manage your subscription: https://lists.techfak.uni-
> > bielefeld.de/mailman/listinfo/systemsafety
> 
> 
> This email has been scanned by BullGuard antivirus protection.
> For more info visit www.bullguard.com
> 
> 

This email has been scanned by BullGuard antivirus protection.
For more info visit www.bullguard.com

_______________________________________________
The System Safety Mailing List
systemsafety at TechFak.Uni-Bielefeld.DE
Manage your subscription: https://lists.techfak.uni-bielefeld.de/mailman/listinfo/systemsafety

  _____  

If you are not the intended recipient, please notify our Help Desk at Email Information.Solutions at nats.co.uk immediately. You should not copy or use this email or attachment(s) for any purpose nor disclose their contents to any other person. 

NATS computer systems may be monitored and communications carried on them recorded, to secure the effective operation of the system. 

Please note that neither NATS nor the sender accepts any responsibility for viruses or any losses caused as a result of viruses and it is your responsibility to scan or otherwise check this email and any attachments. 

NATS means NATS (En Route) plc (company number: 4129273), NATS (Services) Ltd (company number 4129270), NATSNAV Ltd (company number: 4164590) or NATS Ltd (company number 3155567) or NATS Holdings Ltd (company number 4138218). All companies are registered in England and their registered office is at 4000 Parkway, Whiteley, Fareham, Hampshire, PO15 7FL. 

  _____  

This email has been scanned by BullGuard antivirus protection.

For more info visit www.bullguard.com <http://www.bullguard.com/tracking.aspx?affiliate=bullguard&buyaffiliate=smtp&url=/> 

_______________________________________________
The System Safety Mailing List
systemsafety at TechFak.Uni-Bielefeld.DE
Manage your subscription: https://lists.techfak.uni-bielefeld.de/mailman/listinfo/systemsafety

This email and its attachments may contain confidential and/or privileged information.  If you have received them in error you must not use, copy or disclose their content to any person.  Please notify the sender immediately and then delete this email from your system.  This e-mail has been scanned for viruses, but it is the responsibility of the recipient to conduct their own security measures. Airbus Operations Limited is not liable for any loss or damage arising from the receipt or use of this e-mail. 

Airbus Operations Limited, a company registered in England and Wales, registration number, 3468788.  Registered office:  Pegasus House, Aerospace Avenue, Filton, Bristol, BS34 7PA, UK.

This email has been scanned by BullGuard antivirus protection.
For more info visit www.bullguard.com <http://www.bullguard.com/tracking.aspx?affiliate=bullguard&buyaffiliate=smtp&url=/> 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.techfak.uni-bielefeld.de/mailman/private/systemsafety/attachments/20191014/c47528c6/attachment-0001.html>