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

The C++ standard for the F-35 Fighter Jet [video]

youtube.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 451 posts

Re: The C++ standard for the F-35 Fighter Jet [video]

#141

Post by ironhaven »

factorialboy wrote: post #110

Isn't the F35 program considered a failure? Or am I confusing it with some other program?

There have been countless articles claiming the demise and failure of the F35 but that is just one side of the story. There has been an argument started 50 years ago in the 1970's about how to build the best next generation fighter jets. One of these camps was called the "Fighter mafia"[0] figure headed by John Boyd. The main argument they bing was the only thing that matters for a jet fighter is how well it performs in one-on-one short ranged dog fighting. They claim that stealth, beyond visual range missiles, electronic warfare and sensors/datalink systems are useless junk that only hinders the dog fighting capability and bloat the cost of new jets.

The evidence for this claim was found in testing for the F35 where it was dog fighting a older F16. The results of the test where that the F35 won almost every scenario except one where a lightweight fitted F16 was teleported directed behind a F35 weighed down by heavy missiles and won the fight. This one loss has spawned hundreds of articles about how the F35 is junk that can't dogfight.

In the end the F35 has a lot of fancy features that are not optional for modern operations. The jet has now found enough buyers across the west for economies of scale to kick in and the cost is about ~80 million each which is cheaper than retrofitting stealth and sensors onto other air frames like what you get with the F15-EX

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fighter_Mafia

Re: The C++ standard for the F-35 Fighter Jet [video]

#142

Post by don-code »

> All if, else if constructs will contain either a final else clause or a comment indicating why a final else clause is not necessary.

I actually do this as well, but in addition I log out a message like, "value was neither found nor not found. This should never happen."

This is incredibly useful for debugging. When code is running at scale, nonzero probability events happen all the time, and being able to immediately understand what happened - even if I don't understand why - has been very valuable to me.

Re: The C++ standard for the F-35 Fighter Jet [video]

#144

Post by y1n0 »

time4tea wrote: post #45

a = a; // misra Actual code i have seen with my own eyes. (Not in F-35 code) Its a way to avoid removing an unused parameter from a method. Unused parameters are disallowed, but this is fine? I am sceptical that these coding standards make for good code!

The standards don't remove the need for code review. In fact they provide a standard to be used in code review. Anything you can automate is nice, but when you have exceptions to rules that say "Exception, if there's no reasonable way to do X then Y is acceptable" isn't really something you can codify into static analysis.

Re: The C++ standard for the F-35 Fighter Jet [video]

#145

Post by throwaway2037 »

raffael_de wrote: post #66
jandrewrogers wrote: post #8

For those interested, the F-35 (née Joint Strike Fighter) C++ coding standards can be found here, all 142 pages of it: https://www.stroustrup.com/JSF-AV-rules.pdf

Interesting font choice for the code snippets. I wonder if that's been chosen on a whim or if there is a reason for not going with mono space.

The font used for code samples looks nearly the same as "The C++ Programming Languages" (3rd edition / "Wave") by Bjarne Stroustrup. Looking back, yeah, I guess it was weird that he used italic variable width text for code samples, but uses tab stops to align the comments!

Re: The C++ standard for the F-35 Fighter Jet [video]

#146

Post by throwaway2037 »

riku_iki wrote: post #143
chairmansteve wrote: post #133

Ahhh. They use C++..... That explains all the delays on the F-35....,

what would be so obviously better choice of language in your opinion?

You raise a good point. No trolling: I wonder what languages they seriously considered? Example: I am sure the analysis included C in the mix. Also, I wonder if they considered compiler extensions. Example: Since C doesn't have destructors, maybe you could add a compiler extension to add the defer keyword to allow people to schedule object destruction. Even when they decided upon C++, I am sure there was a small holy war to decide what features were allowed. When they started the JSF programmed in the 1990s, C++ compilers were pretty terrible!

Re: The C++ standard for the F-35 Fighter Jet [video]

#147

Post by riku_iki »

throwaway2037 wrote: post #146
riku_iki wrote: post #143

Earlier quoted context omitted.

what would be so obviously better choice of language in your opinion?

You raise a good point. No trolling: I wonder what languages they seriously considered? Example: I am sure the analysis included C in the mix. Also, I wonder if they considered compiler extensions. Example: Since C doesn't have destructors, maybe you could add a compiler extension to add the defer keyword to allow people to schedule object destruction. Even when they decided upon C++, I am sure there was a small holy…

My recollection is that traditionally they used Ada for avionics, but per some internet claims they had difficulties to hire enough Ada programmers for such large projects, so switched to C++.

Re: The C++ standard for the F-35 Fighter Jet [video]

#149

Post by throwaway2037 »

factorialboy wrote: post #110

Isn't the F35 program considered a failure? Or am I confusing it with some other program?

My slightly trollish reply: If you have infinite money, it is hard to fail.

Ok, joking aside: If it is considered a failure, what 100B+ military programme has not been considered a failure?

In my totally unqualified opinion, the best cost performance fighter jet in the world is the Saab JAS 39 Gripen. It is very cheap to buy and operate, and has pretty good capabilities. It's a good option for militaries that don't have the infinite money glitch.

Post reply on HN