I started work on a new manuscript today.
Uncategorized
9
Posts
2
Posters
0
Views
-
I started work on a new manuscript today. No idea how well it will pan out or how saleable it will be, but I do know it will be dramatically more saleable than my last proposal.
Basically, the premise is to gently nudge scientific and engineering developers toward writing high-integrity long-life code. It's still aimed at the #RSE market (which I didn't realize had a name in 2021) but it's focused on a different aspect of the legacy code problem.
In this case I'm explicitly trying to help people write _legacy_ scientific code - code that is good enough at its job that it's difficult to displace and is mature enough to be generally trusted. -
I started work on a new manuscript today. No idea how well it will pan out or how saleable it will be, but I do know it will be dramatically more saleable than my last proposal.
Basically, the premise is to gently nudge scientific and engineering developers toward writing high-integrity long-life code. It's still aimed at the #RSE market (which I didn't realize had a name in 2021) but it's focused on a different aspect of the legacy code problem.
In this case I'm explicitly trying to help people write _legacy_ scientific code - code that is good enough at its job that it's difficult to displace and is mature enough to be generally trusted.I want to set up some fundamentals. For example, I need to specify what kind of software I care about (high-integrity analytical software, a subset of scientific software), who uses it, and what for. This won't match what most programmers or scientific programmers work on but it's important for them to know these kinds of codes exist and regardless of their intent, these are codes they may inadvertently produce. Sort of the scientific software version of Randal Monroe's mythical programmer in Nebraska.
-
I want to set up some fundamentals. For example, I need to specify what kind of software I care about (high-integrity analytical software, a subset of scientific software), who uses it, and what for. This won't match what most programmers or scientific programmers work on but it's important for them to know these kinds of codes exist and regardless of their intent, these are codes they may inadvertently produce. Sort of the scientific software version of Randal Monroe's mythical programmer in Nebraska.
A fun question to ask is how to tell whether a code _works_. There are two critical unknowns: the definition of "works" and "works for whom". A developer may make the naïve assertion "it passes the unit tests therefore the code works". Which is nice and all but nowhere near sufficient. How does a third-party non-developer verify the code works? In the space I work in, this is the more pressing question. The code passing its unit tests is a good sign; it's evidence of good software development practices but it does nothing to tell me if the software is fit for use in my application. That requires that I know my intended use and that's ideally something a developer should know but probably doesn't. If the developer knows their code is used in a safety critical context and they have even a fragment of professional ethics, they will consider whether their unit tests are thorough enough.
-
A fun question to ask is how to tell whether a code _works_. There are two critical unknowns: the definition of "works" and "works for whom". A developer may make the naïve assertion "it passes the unit tests therefore the code works". Which is nice and all but nowhere near sufficient. How does a third-party non-developer verify the code works? In the space I work in, this is the more pressing question. The code passing its unit tests is a good sign; it's evidence of good software development practices but it does nothing to tell me if the software is fit for use in my application. That requires that I know my intended use and that's ideally something a developer should know but probably doesn't. If the developer knows their code is used in a safety critical context and they have even a fragment of professional ethics, they will consider whether their unit tests are thorough enough.
Unit tests are great but if they aren't thorough enough (and with rare exception they aren't), they have limited utility. Devs are bad at testing their own code - too little time, too much emotional and ego attachment, not knowing how or what to test. Nobody will pay for dedicated testers and managers are content with basic functional tests if it means they can ship on schedule.
Do you document your unit tests? How well? Do you share this with your customers?
-
Unit tests are great but if they aren't thorough enough (and with rare exception they aren't), they have limited utility. Devs are bad at testing their own code - too little time, too much emotional and ego attachment, not knowing how or what to test. Nobody will pay for dedicated testers and managers are content with basic functional tests if it means they can ship on schedule.
Do you document your unit tests? How well? Do you share this with your customers?
I want to pose these very basic questions as a very gentle intro to software quality assurance to people who wouldn't voluntarily touch a book on SQA. It's intended to make practitioners (code developers, those who run the codes, and those who rely on the results) ask these basic questions and lead them toward getting answers. If you know someone downstream will/could/should be asking these questions, how does that change your coding practice? Can you make life easier for people downstream? Can you make life _safer_ for people downstream? Can you build that outlook into your practice so you are writing safer and more dependable code out of habit?
-
I want to pose these very basic questions as a very gentle intro to software quality assurance to people who wouldn't voluntarily touch a book on SQA. It's intended to make practitioners (code developers, those who run the codes, and those who rely on the results) ask these basic questions and lead them toward getting answers. If you know someone downstream will/could/should be asking these questions, how does that change your coding practice? Can you make life easier for people downstream? Can you make life _safer_ for people downstream? Can you build that outlook into your practice so you are writing safer and more dependable code out of habit?
How many popular programming books talk about installation, acceptance, and in-service testing even 5% as much as they talk about unit testing? How many scientists snd engineers who write or use software know how to test and evaluate their codes - acquired or internally developed? Even if the vendor hands you a set of acceptance test cases and reference results, how well are they documented? Do they actually test what needs testing? Do they adequately test features critical to your use case? Can you make a convincing case that the software is fit for use?
-
How many popular programming books talk about installation, acceptance, and in-service testing even 5% as much as they talk about unit testing? How many scientists snd engineers who write or use software know how to test and evaluate their codes - acquired or internally developed? Even if the vendor hands you a set of acceptance test cases and reference results, how well are they documented? Do they actually test what needs testing? Do they adequately test features critical to your use case? Can you make a convincing case that the software is fit for use?
You don't need to be working on nuclear safety for this to all be relevant. Your risk tolerance is likely much lower. On the other hand, don't you want know what you expect out of a code and whether it works to the degree you need it to work?
-
You don't need to be working on nuclear safety for this to all be relevant. Your risk tolerance is likely much lower. On the other hand, don't you want know what you expect out of a code and whether it works to the degree you need it to work?
I may have accidentally started writing a weird book on epistemology. Oops.
-
@arclight I'm just a hobby programmer but I'm looking forward to reading the book.
Gli ultimi otto messaggi ricevuti dalla Federazione
-
@mdione I mean, you don't buy your tools based on the availability of free software firmware to flash them with?
I thought that was everybody did these days
(ok, not really. that's what we tend to do, however :) )
-
Moldova, la nuova frontiera dell’Occidente: tra brogli, povertà e ingerenze
-
Questi sono i pro-vita (negli uteri delle donne italiane) che diventano pro-morte (quando vogliono far affogare africani nel mediterraneo) e pro-genocidio (quando vogliono negare la sofferenza di un popolo colonizzato e bombardato). Gli va riconosciuta comunque la coerenza di rimanere sempre e comunque pro-bufale, scegliendo quelle che di volta convengono per sostenere le proprie guerre contro la vita delle donne, dei migranti e dei palestinesi.
-
@SuperDuperKitten
Create your own at YuzuKeycaps, as I did for mine.
-
Tubeless X-Ray Runs on Patience
Every time we check in on [Project326], he’s doing something different with X-rays. This week, he has a passive X-ray imager. On paper, it looks great. No special tube is required and no high voltage needed. Actually, no voltage is needed at all. Of course, there’s no free lunch. What it does take is a long time to produce an image.
While working on the “easy peasy X-ray machine,” dental X-ray film worked well for imaging with a weak X-ray source. He found that the film would also detect exposure to americium 241. So technically, not an X-ray in the strictest sense, but a radioactive image that uses gamma rays to expose the film. But to normal people, a picture of the inside of something is an X-ray even when it isn’t.
What was odd was that he tried three different sources with different materials, and only the Americium made an impression on the film. However, of the three samples, the Americium was the weakest. However, some measurements show that the spectrum of the gamma ray emission for each material is quite different. Clearly, the film was sensitive to a narrow range of gamma rays.
Compared to the previous makeshift X-ray tube, which was weak, the radioactive material emitted just a fraction of that tube’s output. He estimates that the americium, which you can rescue from smoke detectors or repair parts for them, emits less than 1% compared to the tube. He uses twelve of them, however, so the total output should be around 10%.
The image of an IC is impressive. But it also took two days of exposure. Not sure if this would be practical, but if you need imaging after the apocalypse, salvaged smoke detectors and dental film might be what you need.
The upper part of the machine, made from machined copper, looks impressive. It does, however, require some maintenance. We might have been tempted to put some sort of sealant over the copper. The story of how it came to exist isn’t your usual sponsorship story, either.
You might have better luck with the previous X-ray machine. Or bite the bullet, get a real X-ray tube, generate about 70 kV, and make a real one.
-
@Lassielmr @DamonCrowley @ElleGray Don't remind them that we have high speed trains, please.
-
Signal dice che preferirebbe lasciare il mercato piuttosto che rompere la crittografia.
Lungi da me l'essere fan di un'app, ma se sembra quella con più integrità è un problema così grande che sia centralizzata?
Nel frattempo ho già convinto la famiglia a stare su Signal e lì facciamo anche le nostre videochiamate.@Mer__edith https://mastodon.world/@Mer__edith/115344030514203327
-
«Giovedì la Guardia di finanza ha perquisito la casa e l’ufficio di Mazza, con l’incarico anche di sequestrare cellulare e computer. Stando al decreto di perquisizione della procura di Brescia, i fatti contestati sono avvenuti tra il 2017 e il 2022.»
https://flipboard.com/@ilpost/news-6pgniha4z/-/a-DnxMubheSxG0kk6NSxvBxA%3Aa%3A2183656918-%2F0
Post suggeriti
-
Questi sono i pro-vita (negli uteri delle donne italiane) che diventano pro-morte (quando vogliono far affogare africani nel mediterraneo) e pro-genocidio (quando vogliono negare la sofferenza di un popolo colonizzato e bombardato).
Uncategorized
1
-
Tubeless X-Ray Runs on Patience'nEvery time we check in on [Project326], he’s doing something different with X-rays.
Uncategorized
1
-
-
