[yaakov34]

The distance from the that statement to "NASA turned to mathematician Margaret Hamilton, of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, to pioneer and direct the effort" is greater than from the Earth to the Moon. The fact that Margaret Hamilton wrote code for the AGC, and led programmers who wrote code for the AGC, is not in question. However, she reported to, and worked under the direction of, several people who were in charge of developing these programs, among whom David Hoag correctly mentions Frederic Martin, George Cherry, and Dan Lickly. Her period of being the head of program development started after the software was complete.

[nickpsecurity]

I'm getting confused at this point. I thought you were claiming she didn't contribute to the software because you said she showed up after it was frozen. Now, you say:

"The fact that Margaret Hamilton wrote code for the AGC, and led programmers who wrote code for the AGC, is not in question. "

It at least appears contradictory. In any case, you said she didn't contribute to Apollo software, specific ones were frozen, etc. What are your primary sources on those claims so I can review them?

[yaakov34]

I didn't say she did not contribute to the software. I said that she was in charge of program development after the software was frozen, not that she showed up after it was frozen. And minor (but important, since the software was so fragile and critical) changes were still being made after the freeze.

Confirmation that she was still not program development director as of March 28, 1969 (which was only a few months before the Apollo 11 flight, with the software in pretty deep freeze) can be found in the header of the listing of said software.

[nickpsecurity]

That code doesn't prove what you say it proves. That's one snap-shot in time where what you say applies at that moment. There's no telling what happened before or after it by just reading the document. It also doesn't account for the fact that her team worked on multiple modules per Hoag's write-up which just have the team leader's names in that code instead of her team's.

Got any other evidence from primary sources like the one I shared with specific timelines for specific people? I'll actually look that them as I'm willing to change my position with good data. I just tested it on how much her people contributed to the code using the Hoag reference. That got confirmed. Now I'm reassessing her leadership roles within the program.

[yaakov34]

I am not sure what it is for which you want sources. Statements such as "NASA turned to Margaret Hamilton to develop the Apollo software" are absurd; Margaret Hamilton describes being hired onto the project around 1963-1964 rather than resuming her studies at Brandeis; here's one link: http://futurism.com/margaret-hamilton-the-untold-story-of-th.... The AGC project was well under way; which is why people were being hired to join it. Her job was in the COLOSSUS group; she describes herself thus (http://authors.library.caltech.edu/5456/1/hrst.mit.edu/hrs/a...):

"Then, because I was still a beginner, I was assigned responsibility for what was thought to be the least important software to be developed for the next mission. I was the most of the beginners; I mean, I was the first junior person, on this next unmanned mission."

I think it's fair to say she was not "in charge" of things for a while. She was gradually given more responsibility and eventually became the director of COLOSSUS development; Dan Lickly gave her that job. This couldn't have happened until close to the end of COLOSSUS development (it was frozen at the end of 1966, she was "a beginner" in 1964), and I think it was actually after the freeze. She still held the job of COLOSSUS lead programmer in March 1969. She did not become head of program development until Dan Lickly left; which is exactly what she says. This happened after the Apollo 11 flight. Software development was largely complete. So she was not in charge of the team that developed the AGC software while that happened. OK?

I am not saying "she did not contribute" or anything else. I don't know where you got that from what I wrote.

[nickpsecurity]

The above makes a lot of sense. Looks mostly accurate. Appreciate your clarification.