Interestingly, this software was not tested. Testing was actually bypassed as per management’s request because the code change was small.
Sorry, but citation needed.
This “not tested” statement conflicts directly with Dennis Burke’s paper on the outage.
The software update loaded in the 4ESSs had already passed through layers of testing adn had remained unnoticed through the busy Christmas season.
The pseudocode in the article is even cribbed from that paper. And yet, I see no citations to anything about this outage in the original post, even though they are readily available. (The OP seems happy to link to Google SRE stuff, though.)
The hatred of C here is not reasonable. It seems that the author wanted to dunk on the language, but other languages would have known that it was possible to reach all statements in that pseudocode and thus I can’t imagine other languages helping.
Sorry, but citation needed.
This “not tested” statement conflicts directly with Dennis Burke’s paper on the outage.
The pseudocode in the article is even cribbed from that paper. And yet, I see no citations to anything about this outage in the original post, even though they are readily available. (The OP seems happy to link to Google SRE stuff, though.)
This is just newsletter spam that largely copy-pastes the 1995 article.
The hatred of C here is not reasonable. It seems that the author wanted to dunk on the language, but other languages would have known that it was possible to reach all statements in that pseudocode and thus I can’t imagine other languages helping.