|
|
|
|
|
|
by M_Bakhtiari
3051 days ago
|
|
|
> The point is I don't think allowing the modification of software in what is essentially a factory on wheels is a safe thing to do. Someone has to do it. What makes John Deere's embedded software engineers more qualified to write software for a factory on wheels than the embedded software engineers working directly for the farms? Especially when we can't even check the former group's work. |
|
|
Simple, John Deere, probably like us, has spent more testing the software than you could ever do on your own.
You can't judge complex software just by looking at it. It must be tested. People who fail to understand this wind up making these uneducated comments. Go study ISO26262 and the MTB calculations required to pass it and maybe you'll change your tune.
Tested software runs on real vehicles and simulators at large companies, as I stated, running into the multi-million dollar price range. There is zero amount of code inspection the general public can do that would give the same assurances you get through testing.
Bottom line: just looking at code is not enough. You must test it. This is unit tests, simulations, field tests, harsh temperature, vibration, power cycle, high side/low side power distribution, code coverage, etc... None of this is possible by you inspecting code.