Home > C++, technical > Rule-Based Safety

Rule-Based Safety

In this interesting 2006 slide deck, “C++ in safety-critical applications: the JSF++ coding standard“, Bjarne Stroustrup and Kevin Carroll provide the rationale for selecting C++ as the programming language for the JSF (Joint Strike Fighter) jet project:

First, on the language selection:

  • Did not want to translate OO design into language that does not support OO capabilities“.
  • Prospective engineers expressed very little interest in Ada. Ada tool chains were in decline.
  • C++ satisfied language selection criteria as well as staffing concerns.

They also articulated the design philosophy behind the set of rules as:

  • “Provide “safer” alternatives to known “unsafe” facilities.”
  • “Craft rule-set to specifically address undefined behavior.”
  • “Ban features with behaviors that are not 100% predictable (from a performance perspective).”

Note that because of the last bullet, post-initialization dynamic memory allocation (using new/delete) and exception handling (using throw/try/catch) were verboten.

Interestingly, Bjarne and Kevin also flipped the coin and exposed the weaknesses of language subsetting:

lang subsetting

What they didn’t discuss in the slide deck was whether the strengths of imposing a large coding standard on a development team outweigh the nasty weaknesses above. I suspect it was because the decision to impose a coding standard was already a done deal.

S and W

Much as we don’t want to admit it, it all comes down to economics. How much is the lowering of the risk of loss of life worth? No rule set can ever guarantee 100% safety. Like trying to move from 8 nines of availability to 9 nines, the financial and schedule costs in trying to achieve a Utopian “certainty” of safety start exploding exponentially. To add insult to injury, there is always tremendous business pressure to deliver ASAP and, thus,  unconsciously cut corners like jettisoning corner-case system-level testing and fixing hundreds of  “annoying” rules violations.

Does anyone have any data on whether imposing a strict coding standard actually increases the safety of a system? Better yet, is there any data that indicates imposing a standard actually decreases the safety of a system? I doubt that either of these questions can be answered with any unbiased data. We’ll just continue on auto-believing that the answer to the first question is yes because it’s supposed to be self-evident.

  1. No comments yet.
  1. May 24, 2013 at 1:01 am

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: