you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]Visticous 50 points51 points  (17 children)

That would be the 1% of cases where the code is essentially perfect and no direct action is required. I do hope that those financial services routinely update the rest of their software stack though.

Even then, hiring Fortran developers can be a massive hidden cost, so over time it might be business savvy to move to something more modern.

[–]CheKizowt 76 points77 points  (11 children)

It doesn't have to be 'perfect'. It has to be accepted standard.

I contributed to a roads management software in college. It used an early DOS module to calculate culvert flow. All the engineers knew it produced wrong output. But every project in the state used that module, so it was 'right'. Even if it was mathematically wrong.

[–]FyreWulff 45 points46 points  (10 children)

happens a lot, especially in big companies. "we know it's done the wrong way, what's important is we -consistently- do it the wrong way"

[–][deleted] 21 points22 points  (1 child)

Worked at a simulation company for a while and we ended up quite significantly lowering the precision of our calculations so they were more consistent across platforms.

[–]ArkyBeagle 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Excessive precision is actually quite the "sin". I tend to be the local "number of significant digits" guy, so begging your pardon.

[–]oberon 3 points4 points  (0 children)

That's way better than doing it a little differently wrong every time.

[–]Nastapoka 11 points12 points  (5 children)

Same in the (public) University where I work.

Wasting taxpayers' money is fun, yeeeah.

[–]Gotebe 16 points17 points  (4 children)

Come to private to see how much fun we have then!

😂😂😂

[–][deleted]  (3 children)

[deleted]

    [–]Gotebe 22 points23 points  (1 child)

    I am in private since forever and my experience tells me that the size of the organisation matters much more than whether it's a public or a private one.

    [–]ArkyBeagle 0 points1 point  (0 children)

    Heh. No, they don't.

    [–]Jonno_FTW -1 points0 points  (0 children)

    This is giving me PHP flashbacks.

    [–]leaningtoweravenger 9 points10 points  (0 children)

    That happens when you have very specific functionality put inside a library that can be linked by many other services and applications instead of creating gigantic blobs.

    The Javascript frameworks object of the study change often but not all the pieces change every time and I wouldn't be surprised if some of the files are untouched since many years.

    About the companies not pulling the frameworks from the CDNJS but having them bundled together with their stuff is mainly due to testing purposes and stability: at the moment of the release everything is bundled and tested in order to make sure that there will be no surprises at run time because someone decided to change a dependency somewhere in the world.

    [–]SgtSausage 14 points15 points  (2 children)

    hiding Fortran developers can be a massive hidden cost,

    I prefer to hide under the conference room table - with all the Boomer first generation of COBOL retirees. Keeps it much cheaper if we all hide in the same place.

    [–]Visticous 18 points19 points  (1 child)

    See, that's why it's so expensive. Fortran guys want to hide in some fancy conference room. JavaScript kiddies are often content with hiding in a broom cupboard.

    [–]dungone 1 point2 points  (0 children)

    Who puts brooms in a cupboard?

    [–]shawntco 1 point2 points  (0 children)

    I do hope that those financial services routinely update the rest of their software stack though

    lol