🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <8ACALA5@xds13.ferranti.com> peter@ficc.ferranti.com (Peter da Silva) writes:
>In article <49194@nigel.ee.udel.edu> new@ee.udel.edu (Darren New) writes:
>> Actually, I was under the impression that the space shuttle was programmed
>> in FORTH.
>No, but a number of embedded systems on sattelites *are* programmed
>in Forth. The choices available, given the hardware constraints, were
>Forth and raw assembly. The code for systems like this is generally
>desk-checked to the Nth degree.

Yes.  I've read that for the Voyagers, the output of the compiler was
hand checked to make sure that there were no code-generation errors in
the compiler.

However, I thought the NOVA chip is a FORTH chip (i.e., FORTH as its
machine language) that was to replace the old machines in the shuttle.

>> I'm also under the impression that the software has never been the
>> cause of a serious (for some N) problem on the shuttle.
>Well, substantially delaying the first launch could be considered a
>serious problem...

Hmmm... I hadn't heard this one.  I have heard that by the time the
software got to the shuttle simulator, if it (the software) crashed,
somebody lost their job (at least).  I can't imagine the *software*
holding up the launch, but I can imagine hardware causing the software
to hold up the launch (i.e., software aborting the launch because
redundant processors/sensors/actuators/etc failing).

I'll try to find the references.

         -- Darren
-- 
--- Darren New --- Grad Student --- CIS --- Univ. of Delaware ---
----- Network Protocols, Graphics, Programming Languages, FDTs -----
  +=+=+ My time is very valuable, but unfortunately only to me +=+=+
+ When you drive screws with a hammer, screwdrivers are unrecognisable +