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
I don't understand why this dig is constantly taken at software. Look at how many layers of fallbacks exist even on the average webapp written by junior devs. Optimistic rendering on form submissions, graceful degradation of features, falling back to last cached data, HTTP request retries with binomial exponential backoff and jitter, TCP packet retransmits, ECC corrections on servers, etc.

In cases where fault tolerance isn't as robust, it's for the same reasons as other disciplines you mentioned: budget and importance.

>>bilalq+7M1
I think it comes down to to a couple of things that software doesn't have that most other disciplines do:

Standardisation - in the big 'E' Engineering world, there would be a recognised international standard for Web Apps that ensured/enforced that all Web Apps supported this functionality, or they would not be approved for use.

Another factor is Accountability. A senior Software 'Engineer' would have to take personal responsibility (liability, accountability) that the software product they are producing and/or overseeing met all these requirements and personally sign off that these standards have been met. If the product were to fail at any point and it was determined that the cause was negligence in following the standard, any damages sought (not common, but not unheard of) would ultimately find their way to the accountable individual and their insurance.

In cases where budgets/importance don't allow for this level of scrutiny, there would still be paperwork signed by the producer of the software and the client acknowledging deviation from the standard and waiving any recourse for doing so.