• 0 Posts
  • 9 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
Cake day: July 1st, 2023
  • GoosLife@lemmy.worldtoTechnology@lemmy.world•Microsoft sneaks ads into the new Outlook for WindowsEnglish
    4·
    9 months ago

    You should note that this was a Gmail feature that is now made available by a bunch of email providers, but you might wanna check that you do indeed get your emails delivered to plus addresses before you rush out to change your contact info everywhere. Some providers have lacking support and sometimes emails may fail to send to plus addresses even if your side does support it. Using a catchall will always work because you know, that’s just how email works.

  • GoosLife@lemmy.worldtoTechnology@lemmy.world•German railway seeks IT admin to manage MS-DOS and Windows 3.11 systemsEnglish
    2·
    9 months ago

    It is definitely the exact opposite of this. Even though I understand why you would think this.

    The thing with systems like these is they are mission critical, which is usually defined as failure = loss of life or significant monetary loss (like, tens of millions of dollars).

    Mission critical software is not unit tested at all. It is proven. What you do is you take the code line by line, and you prove what each line does, how it does it, and you document each possible outcome.

    Mission critical software is ridiculously expensive to develop for this exact reason. And upgrading to deploy on different systems means you’ll be running things in a new environment, which introduces a ton of unknown factors. What happens, on a line by line basis, when you run this code on a faster processor? Does this chip process the commands in a slightly different order because they use a slightly different algorithm? You don’t know until you take the new hardware, the new software, and the code, then go through the lengthy process of proving it again, until you can document that you’ve proven that this will not result in any unusual train behavior.