New Testingstan

Oxymoron wrote:Why does it seems that in real-world engineering, conceiving things in very conservative ways, taking minimums risks and making sure things will works in the most adverse condition is something every engineer should strive for

while in software engineering it's all shortcuts and custom "cook-book" solutions ?

Q: What does a programmer call poorly written code?

A: Job security

Civil War Man wrote:Q: What does a programmer call poorly written code?

A: Job security

Dat truth, it hurt.

Civil War Man wrote:

Oxymoron wrote:Why does it seems that in real-world engineering, conceiving things in very conservative ways, taking minimums risks and making sure things will works in the most adverse condition is something every engineer should strive for

while in software engineering it's all shortcuts and custom "cook-book" solutions ?

Q: What does a programmer call poorly written code?

A: Open Source.

Fixed that for you.

Jesus, gamer is a tool.

Civil War Man wrote:Q: What does a programmer call poorly written code?

A: Job security

hahha so one of my ongoing jobs is an hourly thing to fix bugs

last year i had like 88 hours for them fixing all kinds of bugs in their shitty app

and at they rate they pay that's a fair chunk of change


but so far this year i have.... i think 6, i'd have to check, but it isn't very much at all and the year is already 1/4 gone

it still trickles in which tells me i wasn't just like silently fired

but it is so slow i fear i might have already fixed all the big bugs



but its ok, eventually one of their clients will ask for a change

then we'll be back in bug city

Is that right

Oxymoron wrote:Why does it seems that in real-world engineering, conceiving things in very conservative ways, taking minimums risks and making sure things will works in the most adverse condition is something every engineer should strive for

Space Shuttle software development. This is a pretty special case, though (relatively fixed requirements, risk-adverse customer and virtually unlimited budget).

Oxymoron wrote:My mother, which has she said has worked on "IT Urbanism" [1] (she has been retired for 5 years, now), told me that lately the work methodology was to begin from test units, and going up from there : you know your inputs and the outputs you want, you build you block, you test it, you debug it, rinse and repeat until it's proven to work, and then you move to your next block. Extreme Programming it's called, I think. She said it had good results, in term of quality and speed-of-development.

She was working at France Telecom's R&D department, though, so it may not be a work methodology adapted to every corporations...

Core telecom code tends to be ultra-conservative since in most countries it is considered a necessary utility and heavily regulated.

Test-driven-development is not Extreme Programming though it is a component of it.

Wow, Xeriar is damn rather ignorant about the actual boot process linky. Once the kernel loads it's own drivers, they need to find the OS partition to keep loading bits and it doesn't use the BIOS unless it is absolutely needed. Which means how the BIOS presents a USB device to the bootloader really has fuck all todo with if an OS can boot off a random storage device via some arbitary protocal.

And why the fuck is he talking about partitions? The BIOS doesn't care, it just loads X bytes at 'Y' location on the boot device, and the OS bootrecord (to bit the BIOS calls) only needs to care in that it can address where it calls next (aka use offsets which can handle >2tb of diskspace).

Not going to bother posting on sd.net, because what the hell is the point?

phongn wrote:Test-driven-development is not Extreme Programming though it is a component of it.

Test-driven development is something I actually had a chance todo, but that requires knowing what the fucking inputs are and what the outputs need to be.

Civil War Man wrote:

Oxymoron wrote:Why does it seems that in real-world engineering, conceiving things in very conservative ways, taking minimums risks and making sure things will works in the most adverse condition is something every engineer should strive for

while in software engineering it's all shortcuts and custom "cook-book" solutions ?

Q: What does a programmer call poorly written code?

A: Job security

A maintenance nightmare which is good for job security.

Hey Strak that CIWS quip in the g&c thread was for you my fellow robot driver

Oh don't worry I got it

I was too busy being astonished by people claiming xwing was like star wars beyond 'has xwings'

Gotta wonder how screwed obi would have been if Slave 1 used its light minute sensors to shoot more than one missile

Ps Shin Kudo figured out two missiles flying an F-14

if wedge had set his shields to double rear vader would have had to shoot him about 60 times :V

Look man, you get to attack the DS at Endor.

starku wrote:if wedge had set his shields to double rear vader would have had to shoot him about 60 times :V

Stabilize ur rear deflectors

xon wrote:Not going to bother posting on sd.net, because what the hell is the point?

Educate the peanut gallery reading it and not Xerier?

Test-driven development is something I actually had a chance todo, but that requires knowing what the fucking inputs are and what the outputs need to be.

Some of our inputs can use it - I want to force it there (also, much of our core analysis code is written by scientists who do not understand software engineering - not their fault but it can be annoying).

xon wrote: Not going to bother posting on sd.net, because what the hell is the point?

i'll rattle their cage a bit

Veef wrote:Hey Strak that CIWS quip in the g&c thread was for you my fellow robot driver

I know you like gundam better than SW, but do you really have to take potshots at it in every thread you see? In vs debate threads it's just pointing out weaknesses, but no one even mentioned mecha at all.

its nothing to do with gundam dude

but a missile only fractionally faster than a missile chased them for ages and ages and ages and ages because they had no countermeaasures and that's FUNNY

they're in space they could have just rotated and shot it, lol

too bad they're trapped in ww2

i draw the line at korea george!

Anakin actually does pull a 180 and shoot down missiles in both Clone Wars series, so I think it's just that Obi-Wan isn't that great of a pilot.

EDIT: But the basic jist of you guy's argument in that thread is correct. The XWing and TF games are fun, but the dogfighting really doesn't "feel" like Star Wars. Thematically, I think Alliance felt similar to the movies, but the mechanics of it didn't.

i think you mean

george isn't looking so the tv series can do that stuff
the agility in the movies is dogshit horrible

the agility in the cartoon is exciting amazing win

HMMMMM

i draw the line at exciting dogfights george

but man what i think it is with xwing is that people played it when they were 8 or whatever and there was nothing else

so they invested it with star wars

and now they still have that sense, but it's not because of the content of the game

Nowadays when I want to do SW dogfighting I plug in my gamecube (or even my old N64) and play the more "arcade-ish" Rogue Squadron series.

Although the first game has some stupidly hard levels that nearly induced controller-hurling fits of rage.

its really funny that those games had way more zoom zoom pew pew than xwing

and seriosuly those tunnels in tie fighter make it clear you're moving at '80' a few tie-lengths a second at best

pretty sad really :V

I never did any of the training ring missions. At least the combat missions have some excitement to them.

X-Wing Vs. Tie Fighter and X-Wing alliance are better in this regard because they don't have any of the really long and annoying "fly to this objective" missions like the first two. In X-Wing vs. Tie Fighter, you start out right in the middle of the action, and in X-Wing Alliance you make one quick hyperjump to the combat zone, with the occasional bit of storyline exposition.

Darksi4190 wrote:
I know you like gundam better than SW, but do you really have to take potshots at it in every thread you see?

M.Bison: OF COURSE

the HAB used to descend on every mecha thread to be dicks but Star Wars got praised for best space army all the time by the same people

But seriously, I think stuff like AOTC shows that when you extend SW's very basic combat without thinking it just becomes silly. The ROTJ battle was cool from a technical standpoint but using CGI to make it longer and bigger shows the limitations of model work in a way that doesn't scale up at all.