Originally Posted by
WHBM
This just reminds me of one of our own programmers' responses to a fault issue. "Works As Coded". Well of course it Works As Coded. All computer programs do. But the coding is fundamentally wrong.
I think when MurphyWasRight said
"It is useful to keep in mind that as far as we know the MCAS software worked exactly as specified/designed/implemented"
he was meaning:
- the MCAS software worked exactly as specified.
- its design accurately matched the specification.
- its implementation accurately matched the design.
It seems a case of a specification being accurately implemented, rather than "the [MCAS] coding [being] fundamentally wrong".
Sadly, the risk-analysis of the specification was badly flawed.
As a retired s/w engineer I'm all too ready to criticise s/w SNAFUs, but I cannot see that this is one.