zlacker

>>belter+(OP)
Every time I read about space engineering, I'm amazed by how contingencies have contingencies. It's so much careful planning and rigor compared to my world. I can always re-compile, re-deploy and regularly realize that my job is not life or death.

>>notyou+Bc1
Honestly, I'd say most engineering is like that outside of the software world. In the classic engineering disciplines with actual licensures at the end of the pipeline, the responsibility and ethics of this are ingrained into students from day 1. (Budget and importance of the application doesn't always allow for the indulgence of this though, at least to a point.)

This type of thinking also follows from decades of experience.

For some reason the software engineering world largely abandoned esteem and respect for all of the above.

>>Engine+pg1
Errors in software rarely ever matter and even when they do, can usually be trivially corrected.

>>throwa+zB1
It’s not life or death, but time spent dealing with errors - debugging, the direct effects, understanding full impact - isn’t a resource we can get back.

>>progra+JG1
I find myself thinking about that a lot - mainly "how many more hours would have needed to be spent at stage A to avoid the hours being spent now to recover from problems our software is currently causing". And often if I'm honest with myself it's hard to see that the extra investment of time earlier on would have necessarily resulted in a net productivity gain. It would however likely be a less stressful way to work (building fire-proof code rather than putting fires out all the time), and rather more satisfying. As an engineer of any sort I think it's perfectly reasonable and justifiable to want to produce something of quality even if it takes longer and the consequences probably won't be that terrible if you just release the first thing you can slap together. Unfortunately others are almost entirely motivated by the (not entirely irrational) fear of what happens if you don't release something quickly enough.