Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Gordon Moore has died

moore.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 250 posts

Re: Gordon Moore has died

#141

Post by komali2 »

agumonkey wrote: post #136
layer8 wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I suspect the same holds true for hardware bugs in silicon, given the increasing complexity of CPUs. ;)

Maybe I'm naive but i think hardware cannot afford such condition. Even the name is a hint, software was termed so because it was easier to modify, allowing more errors to get in because you can fix it later at a lower cost.

Would fabrication failure be considered a bug? Isn't the rate kinda up there for chips that don't make it out of the factory? Not to mention on arrival there's a failure rate.

But also, I don't know too much about this, but when Linus tech tips did a tour of a chip fabrication plant, I remember learning that apparently the high end chips are chips where all the little bits inside all work, and if they detect like, busted wee transistors or whatever, they can just use that chip as a lower power processor. If that's the case that's like... Kinda a bug, but they just "code around it," right?

Re: Gordon Moore has died

#142

Post by pronto-columnar »

fisherjeff wrote: post #97

Weird how this works sometimes… I was just at the Monterey Bay Aquarium for the first time today, saw the name on the auditorium and thought “ that Gordon (and Betty) Moore?” Truly an incredible place, and thanks in very large part to the Moores. RIP Gordon.

Wow this has made me realise that the maths library at Cambridge was also sponsored by them. Never really gave a thought to it until now, just assumed they were some random rich alumni!

Re: Gordon Moore has died

#143

Post by girvo »

rfoo wrote: post #140
agumonkey wrote: post #136

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe I'm naive but i think hardware cannot afford such condition. Even the name is a hint, software was termed so because it was easier to modify, allowing more errors to get in because you can fix it later at a lower cost.

Reading errata for Intel/AMD processors would be an eye opening experience then. There are so many bugs in features you never heard of, just like software. It is inevitable given the complexity.

Reading errata for just the various STM32 microcontrollers was enough to dissuade me of the notion that hardware is infallible!

Re: Gordon Moore has died

#144

Post by kitd »

kqr wrote: post #139
spullara wrote: post #89

I once got the opportunity to ask Gordon Moore a question, “what is the equivalent of Moore’s Law for software?” His response, “number of bugs doubles every year”. Great man.

Since IIRC bug count is roughly proportional to source code line count, this implies the aggregate complexity of software doubles too. That might sound foreign, but if you think duplicated effort and accidental complexity rather than problem domain complexity it wouldn't surprise me if it was close to true. Points to the value of sticking close to the problem domain.

I heard error count is proportional to LoC + # of developers involved in writing it. So as well as the accidental complexity from LoC, the more people touch a code base, the greater the chance of broken communication and misunderstandings. Ie bugs.

Re: Gordon Moore has died

#146

Post by fest »

girvo wrote: post #143
rfoo wrote: post #140

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Reading errata for Intel/AMD processors would be an eye opening experience then. There are so many bugs in features you never heard of, just like software. It is inevitable given the complexity.

Reading errata for just the various STM32 microcontrollers was enough to dissuade me of the notion that hardware is infallible!

My personal favourite is from STM32F427:

"When PA12 is used as GPIO or alternate function in input or output mode, the data read from flash memory (bank2, upper 1MB) might be corrupted."

I can't even imagine the head scratching one might go through if hit by this, particularly late in development process (when the firmware becomes larger than 1MB).

Re: Gordon Moore has died

#147

Post by spinlock_ »

GalenErso wrote: post #20
acjohnson55 wrote: post #12

Wow, we have lost a true legend. As I get older, I marvel a bit at the giants I once shared time on the earth with. Sometimes it feels like we don't have giants in the 21st century in the same way.

I sometimes make myself a mental list of famous people who are expected to die soon. The following people will all die in the next few years: Jimmy Carter (98), Henry Kissinger (99), Dick Cheney (82), Pope Francis (86), Paul McCartney (80), John Williams (91), William Shatner (92), and Ali Khamenei (83).

Warren Buffett (92)

Re: Gordon Moore has died

#148

Post by agumonkey »

rfoo wrote: post #140
agumonkey wrote: post #136

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe I'm naive but i think hardware cannot afford such condition. Even the name is a hint, software was termed so because it was easier to modify, allowing more errors to get in because you can fix it later at a lower cost.

Reading errata for Intel/AMD processors would be an eye opening experience then. There are so many bugs in features you never heard of, just like software. It is inevitable given the complexity.

I'm sure there are tons of bugs, I was told a few stories by people in aerospace industry. But I think they cannot survive if they don't keep the number ultra low, because they can't fix it (well except microcode level).

Re: Gordon Moore has died

#150

Post by tephra »

spullara wrote: post #89

I once got the opportunity to ask Gordon Moore a question, “what is the equivalent of Moore’s Law for software?” His response, “number of bugs doubles every year”. Great man.

This made me immediately think of "The bug count also rises" http://www.snider.com/jeff/hemingway.html and of course Bryan Cantrills reading of it: https://youtu.be/4PaWFYm0kEw?t=1243
Post reply on HN