And, supposing this is true, would you actually be surprised by this? This is a car company, not a CI and code-review obsessed software company in Silicon Valley.
> This is a car company, not a CI and code-review obsessed software company in Silicon Valley.
I read that as:
> This is a company whose products are high-velocity 1500kg chunks of steel zooming around in public, not a company that sells an intangible virtual good/service
---
Yes, I know software is historically poor with car companies, but we should still expect better. Let's not just lower our standards because of cynicism :-)
I found products made by car companies to be in general more reliable than those made by software companies (either in Silicon Valley or not).
I trust my life to my car (software included) every day. I wouldn't do that with any software of my smartphone, not even the OS.
Doesn't it blow your mind that there are no "standards of engineering" or whatever for software? There's no licensure body for software engineers who build software running your car, and therefore no accountability on a personal level.
When an engineer builds a bridge, she has to personally sign off on the bridge, saying it's safe, and is risking not only her professional career, but I think she can also be jailed and held criminally liable if the bridge kills people due to negligence.
It blows my mind, at least, that no such thing exists for software.
The big problem with all those standards, frankly, is that you've gotta pay money to actually evaluate them.
There aren't any guarantees that they'll be useful, that they'll match the modern development processes in your language, that they'll fit your problem domain, etc.
Those standards are there primarily to make the publisher a buck--not to represent the codified wisdom of up-to-date practitioners in a field.
Until we've got a truly open-source standard for people to code against, we should stop wringing our hands about these things.
If you could have perfectly safe software, without requiring individual engineers to be licensed, would that be acceptable to you?
I'm not asking if you think such a thing would be possible or not - I'm asking if you would accept an alternate means of getting what I think we both want.
And a German one and from experience dealing with German companies software isn't regarded I the same light as what they would consider "proper engineering"
Then you don't know the motor industry very much as it has very strict coding standards like ISO 26262, the code has to be audited internally and by certified 3rd parties with every release to meet the development cycle requirements of the standards.
http://www.ldra.com/en/software-quality-test-tools/group/by-....
The industry also has specific coding standard for every language that is used in embedded systems like MISRA-C https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MISRA_C
I read that as:
> This is a company whose products are high-velocity 1500kg chunks of steel zooming around in public, not a company that sells an intangible virtual good/service
---
Yes, I know software is historically poor with car companies, but we should still expect better. Let's not just lower our standards because of cynicism :-)