Decompression Software reliability – how to assess?

[Lorenzoid]

I'm not sure where you get “every product is a one off, finely handcrafted from scratch” . . . .

In the late 1800s, before Ford's assembly line, that's how cars were built.

 

[joshk]

In the late 1800s, before Ford's assembly line, that's how cars were built.

I understand what it refers to on the automotive side, I don't know where that statement is backed by on a software side.

 

[Lorenzoid]

I understand what it refers to on the automotive side, I don't know where that statement is backed by on a software side.

Okay. I mistakenly understood your statement as referring to the automobile industry because it was preceded by "Toyota recently recalled millions of vehicles."

As for giffenk's implication that software is, like 1800s automobiles, still basically an artisan product, I took it as a bit of hyperbole on his part. We know software design is more automated than that, but we also know it's not an assembly line process.

 

[joshk]

As for giffenk's implication that software is, like 1800s automobiles, still basically an artisan product, I took it as a bit of hyperbole on his part. We know software design is more automated than that, but we also know it's not an assembly line process.

Software applications are artisanal. Rock crawling in a Jeep is artisanal. Tires are not artisanal.

The analogy @giffenk makes breaks because software isn't repeatedly manufactured like a car. There are foundational pieces and applications created with those pieces.

 

[Lorenzoid]

So if I understand correctly, you want to split hairs as to whether we are talking about a decompression software "application" or pieces of a decompression software application.

 

[joshk]

So if I understand correctly, you want to split hairs as to whether we are talking about a decompression software "application" or pieces of a decompression software application.

It's incorrect to say a piston rod is “product is a one off, finely handcrafted from scratch” because it's inside a Jeep that someone rock crawls in. The statement made earlier is incorrect:

...software industry is still mostly a cottage industry, using trial and error methods. Hence lots of failures.

 

[Lorenzoid]

I would be willing to bet that decompression applications don't use many off-the-shelf parts the way some giant commercial application might--they are niche products. But I think I get your point if you're talking about the software industry as a whole versus the automobile industry as a whole.

 

[divad]

So what computer should I buy?

 

[KenGordon]

Back to the actual software....

I have seen bugs in dive computers, dive logging/planing software and dive planing software. On mentioning the last one in a general way a different vendor, assuming I was talking about them, popped up to say that they had already fixed the issue.

Mostly dive related software is small scale and not as safety critical as many other systems (ask how many people die at a time?) so this is to be expected.

I would be willing to bet that decompression applications don't use many off-the-shelf parts the way some giant commercial application might--they are niche products. But I think I get your point if you're talking about the software industry as a whole versus the automobile industry as a whole.

99.99% of the code executed when running a planning app with be OS and library provided utilities mostly concerned with the presentation on the screen, talking to the keyboard, disk, manipulating strings and so forth. Some hundreds to a small number of thousands of lines of code code will be to do with decompression related issues. The rest will be shared with apps for recipes, reprogramming car ECUs and watching cats do stupid things.

 

[Lorenzoid]

I suppose I shouldn't have said off-the-shelf parts. I was thinking of the decompression-specific parts not being off-the-shelf, and libraries, etc., weren't on my radar. You are certainly correct.