[lug] Software complexity

[Zan Lynx]

On 10/20/09 3:22 PM, Chris Riddoch wrote:
> This discussion on software quality, and our frustrations with the
> causes of bad quality, reflects some of the things I've been thinking
> about over the past year or two.
>
> You all know the saying: Fast, Cheap or Good - pick only two.  Maybe
> I've been at the wrong places, but I've never seen any place actually
> give any priority to software being good, rather than fast or cheap.
> I know I'm a perfectionist, and that my managers have beat their heads
> against walls trying to get me to acknowledge that "good enough" is
> indeed distinguishable from perfect.  (I seem to make a better QA
> person than a developer, these days.)
>
> My RSI isn't the only thing that's made me frustrated with working on
> software for a living.  If anyone can offer me a story where the
> quality of software was considered more important than either being
> done fast or cheaply, please share it and give me a little hope.
> Alternatively, some equivalent of alt.sysadmin.recovery for developers
> would be appreciated.  (Actually, if anyone knows of such a forum, in
> which developers are brainstorming career changes, I'd love to hear
> about it... off-list, of course, to avoid spreading my cynicism too
> far.)
>

I'd guess you need to find work in aerospace, life-critical systems or 
something similar.

Try Ball Aerospace or Lockheed Martin. They are both local. I know that 
the last thing anyone wants is a $60+ million piece of hardware failing 
because of some bad code, so they are willing to spend a few million on 
quality.

There are some strict deadlines in space work and most of it is 
government funded on cost-plus contracts so the goals are Good and Fast. 
Cheap is not really in there. :)

Ask my dad about JPL sometime (He works for Ball). JPL wouldn't know a 
budget if one bit the project manager.
-- 
Zan Lynx
zlynx at acm.org

"Knowledge is Power.  Power Corrupts.  Study Hard.  Be Evil."