Robust Programming Design
Verizon and worked hard on finding a solution for the problem, and they even delayed the handset's launch by several weeks in an attempt to optimize it for use on 4G. The new software, available as version 1.4.1, can be downloaded for free, and offers the same functionality as other apps in the storefront, which are paid, can offer. Further optimizations in this area come from the aforementioned application, called LTE OnOFF, which is available for download from the Android Market. The new mobile application, designed specifically for the ThunderBolt, was meant to enable users easily torn the 4G on or off on their devices, so as to save more battery life. Htc thunderbolt battery. The support for Verizon's Long Term Evolution network has been long said to be one of the main reasons for which the battery inside ThunderBolt is being drained so fast.
What is the point of checking a third state when a third state is logically impossible? What about a Boolean? That allows for a NULL state that is neither true nor false. Now what should the software do? Some software has to be highly crash-resistant like pacemakers. Ever seen someone add a column to a database that was a Boolean and initialize the current data to NULL initially? I know I've seen it.
Here are a few links that discuss what it means to be robust in terms of software: • • • • If you think there is one universally agreed upon definition of 'robust' here, good luck. There can be some synonyms like bomb-proof or idiot-proof. Would be an example of someone that usually writes robust code at least in my understanding of the terms. The last if certainly be triggered, it wouldn't require really that much effort. Any experienced C programmer have seen values suddenly change. Of course logically, in a controlled single-threaded environment, this should never happen. In real life, the code inside the if will eventually happen.
If there's nothing useful you can do inside that if, then don't code it! (I had a funny experience during a particular software development where I raised an exception with curse words in case something impossible happened.
Guess what happened?). – Nov 24 '16 at 18:03 2. There is no agreed upon definition of Robust Code, as for many things in programming it's more or less subjective. The example your professor gives depends on the language: • In Haskell, a Boolean can be either True or False, there is no third option • In C++, a bool can be true, false, or (unfortunately) come from some dubious cast that put it in an unknown case.
This should not happen, but may, as a result of a previous error. However, what your professor is advising obscures the code by introducing extraneous logic for should-not-happen events in the middle of the core program, so I will point you, instead, toward. Your professor's approach is totally misguided. A function, or just a bit of code, should have a spec that says what it does, which should cover every possible input.
And the code should be written so that its behaviour is guaranteed to match the spec. In the example, I would write the spec quite simple like this: Spec: If var is false then the function does 'this', otherwise it does 'that'.
Robust distributed linear programming. Solution of the linear program and are robust to disturbances. Driven the design of efficient methods to solve linear op. ROBUST DESIGN. Industrial Engineering 361 Katie Maurer. February 11, 2000. Gerber knife serial number lookup. What is robust product design? Robust product design is a concept from the.
IEEE Transactions On Automatic Control
Then you write the function: if (var == false) dothis; else dothat; and the code meets the spec. So your professor says: What if var == 42? Look at the spec: It says the function should do 'that'.
Look at the code: The function does 'that'. The function meets the spec. Where your professor's code makes things totally unrobust is the fact that with his approach, when var is neither true nor false, it will execute code that has never been called before and that is completely untested, with utterly unpredictable results. I agree with @gnasher729 's statement: Your professor's approach is totally misguided. Robust means it's resistant to breakage/failure because it makes few assumptions and is decoupled: it's self contained, self defining, and portable. It also includes being adaptable to changing requirements.
Dean Richert
In a word, your code is durable. This generally translates into short functions that get their data from parameters passed in by the caller, and the use of public interfaces for consumers - abstract methods, wrappers, indirection, COM style interfaces, etc - rather than functions containing concrete implementation code. I personally describe a code as 'robust' which has this one, important attributes: • If my mom sits in front of it and work with it, she can't break the system Now, by break I mean either getting the system into an unstable state, or causing an UNHANDLED exception. You know, sometimes for a simple concept, you can make a complex definition and explanation. But I'd prefer simple definitions. Users are pretty good at finding robust applications. If the user of your application send you many requests about bugs, about state loss, about unintuitive workflows, etc., then there is something wrong with your programming.