6 ms·

The definition of 'perfect software' used in the talk is 'it gives you the correct output for every input in the input domain'. To that end no funny business li

The definition of 'perfect software' used in the talk is 'it gives you the correct output for every input in the input domain'. To that end no funny business like hidden allocations or hidden control flow should happen behind your back, because an out of memory error or some exception your code does not deal with explicitly would not be a correct output according to that definition. Of course you do not need that level of control for most projects.

electrograv 8y ago
While I agree with the content of your post literally, I think we often underestimate the importance of software reliability and performance, and end up giving it less attention than it deserves. I understand the place for rapid prototyping etc., and that not every software application deals with life-and-death situations — but even those that aren’t, I think our industry suffers a bit here. For example, to this day the Windows 10 start menu refuses to open sometimes (randomly) when I click on it, even multiple times. You could argue that this isn’t a huge deal, because within 30 seconds it usually “fixes itself” (or something like that), but it still doesn’t shake the overall feeling that we’re tolerating way too much shoddy software in 2018 than we should. Or in terms of performance: I know not every application needs bare-to-the-metal speed, but something feels wrong with the world when my “supercomputer” (compared to a 1990s PC, for example) literally lags when I’m typing or scrolling in some apps, when a 1990s era PC could respond to essentially the same content interaction with almost zero latency. Some few decades ago, we had far more klunkier programming languages, far slower hardware, and yet somehow yielded better tangible/functional results in some cases. Therefore, I’m very much in favor of anything that moves us towards higher quality software, and Zig (and Rust, and others) are all exciting examples of that.
- bjourne 8y ago
  It is entirely possible that even if Windows 10 was perfect software according to the "it gives you the correct output for every input in the input domain" definition, it would still not open the start menu every time you clicked on the icon.
  - electrograv 8y ago
    Of course we can redefine bugs as features, but to present that as an argument is a “red herring”: I can assure you, the Windows 10 start menu is not i tended to fail or delay opening instantly upon click or system button press.
    - bjourne 8y ago
      Why is that a red herring? Isn't it relevant that even if the software is perfect (according to the definition) it might not do what the user wants?
  - dmpk2k 8y ago
    But less likely. It's clear what his point is.
- Scarbutt 8y ago
  Really though, what's up with the windows 10 start menu...
- euyyn 8y ago
  In over 6 years working in this industry, in projects with anywhere from dozens of users to millions of users, not a single bug I have encountered was caused by a "hidden allocation" causing the process to go OOM. Not one instance. One of the two examples he cited in his introduction, the Android one, wasn't even caused by an unhandled OOM error. Android by design will kill unused processes if they're occupying memory that the foreground process needs. If we want software without bugs, removing hidden allocations in languages is far down in the priority list.
  - theparanoid 8y ago
    The vast majority of bugs aren't are due to corner cases that the programmer didn't think about. Quickcheck and related techniques expose many more bugs than eliminating OOM bugs.
  - mschwaig 8y ago
    Yes for most userland applications removing hidden allocations is not a concern, which is why for most general purpose programming languages this is way down the priority list. Most languages make allocations behind your back so that your code can focus on the logic you actually care about since you could not do anything about running ot of memory anyways. However there are projects where that level of control matters. For those projects C is currently still the default choice, even though it was designed more than 40 years ago. Some choices made back then might be huge liabilities for code we are writing now, because we still need that kind of language. A modern alternative to C could provide a huge value to all of us, mostly through more correct, secure and/or performant software.

electrograv 8y ago

While I agree with the content of your post literally, I think we often underestimate the importance of software reliability and performance, and end up giving it less attention than it deserves. I understand the place for rapid prototyping etc., and that not every software application deals with life-and-death situations — but even those that aren’t, I think our industry suffers a bit here. For example, to this day the Windows 10 start menu refuses to open sometimes (randomly) when I click on it, even multiple times. You could argue that this isn’t a huge deal, because within 30 seconds it usually “fixes itself” (or something like that), but it still doesn’t shake the overall feeling that we’re tolerating way too much shoddy software in 2018 than we should. Or in terms of performance: I know not every application needs bare-to-the-metal speed, but something feels wrong with the world when my “supercomputer” (compared to a 1990s PC, for example) literally lags when I’m typing or scrolling in some apps, when a 1990s era PC could respond to essentially the same content interaction with almost zero latency. Some few decades ago, we had far more klunkier programming languages, far slower hardware, and yet somehow yielded better tangible/functional results in some cases. Therefore, I’m very much in favor of anything that moves us towards higher quality software, and Zig (and Rust, and others) are all exciting examples of that.

bjourne 8y ago
It is entirely possible that even if Windows 10 was perfect software according to the "it gives you the correct output for every input in the input domain" definition, it would still not open the start menu every time you clicked on the icon.
- electrograv 8y ago
  Of course we can redefine bugs as features, but to present that as an argument is a “red herring”: I can assure you, the Windows 10 start menu is not i tended to fail or delay opening instantly upon click or system button press.
  - bjourne 8y ago
    Why is that a red herring? Isn't it relevant that even if the software is perfect (according to the definition) it might not do what the user wants?
- dmpk2k 8y ago
  But less likely. It's clear what his point is.
Scarbutt 8y ago
Really though, what's up with the windows 10 start menu...
euyyn 8y ago
In over 6 years working in this industry, in projects with anywhere from dozens of users to millions of users, not a single bug I have encountered was caused by a "hidden allocation" causing the process to go OOM. Not one instance. One of the two examples he cited in his introduction, the Android one, wasn't even caused by an unhandled OOM error. Android by design will kill unused processes if they're occupying memory that the foreground process needs. If we want software without bugs, removing hidden allocations in languages is far down in the priority list.
- theparanoid 8y ago
  The vast majority of bugs aren't are due to corner cases that the programmer didn't think about. Quickcheck and related techniques expose many more bugs than eliminating OOM bugs.
- mschwaig 8y ago
  Yes for most userland applications removing hidden allocations is not a concern, which is why for most general purpose programming languages this is way down the priority list. Most languages make allocations behind your back so that your code can focus on the logic you actually care about since you could not do anything about running ot of memory anyways. However there are projects where that level of control matters. For those projects C is currently still the default choice, even though it was designed more than 40 years ago. Some choices made back then might be huge liabilities for code we are writing now, because we still need that kind of language. A modern alternative to C could provide a huge value to all of us, mostly through more correct, secure and/or performant software.