From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,FREEMAIL_FROM autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Received: by 2002:a0c:ec8f:: with SMTP id u15mr12742834qvo.102.1589737086896; Sun, 17 May 2020 10:38:06 -0700 (PDT) X-Received: by 2002:aca:ed10:: with SMTP id l16mr3291763oih.84.1589737086762; Sun, 17 May 2020 10:38:06 -0700 (PDT) Path: eternal-september.org!reader01.eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!news.gegeweb.eu!gegeweb.org!news.muarf.org!nntpfeed.proxad.net!proxad.net!feeder1-2.proxad.net!209.85.160.216.MISMATCH!news-out.google.com!nntp.google.com!postnews.google.com!google-groups.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Date: Sun, 17 May 2020 10:38:06 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com Injection-Info: google-groups.googlegroups.com; posting-host=47.185.215.60; posting-account=zwxLlwoAAAChLBU7oraRzNDnqQYkYbpo NNTP-Posting-Host: 47.185.215.60 References: <3baf4a73-aae7-4f99-9786-ba5153118c81@googlegroups.com> User-Agent: G2/1.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 Message-ID: <1ab5756b-81d8-4b2f-80ff-feeca5270903@googlegroups.com> Subject: Re: Not to incite a language war but apparently the Corona lockdown was based on 13 year old undocumented C-Code From: Optikos Injection-Date: Sun, 17 May 2020 17:38:06 +0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Xref: reader01.eternal-september.org comp.lang.ada:58713 Date: 2020-05-17T10:38:06-07:00 List-Id: On Sunday, May 17, 2020 at 10:41:39 AM UTC-5, Niklas Holsti wrote: > On 2020-05-17 2:54, Optikos wrote: > > On Saturday, May 16, 2020 at 5:31:17 PM UTC-5, Niklas Holsti wrote: > >> On 2020-05-11 21:49, Rick Newbie wrote: > >>> This link is probably not reported in the MSM very much but I think i= t's > >>> relevant. Not that I believe that Ada would have magically made > >>> everything better, but to base the decision to destroy the Western > >>> economies on code written in the C language that isn't even commented= is > >>> somewhat out of dystopian fantasy. There's a reason C is not used in > >>> safety critical applications. > >>> I want to share this article here before it gets buried in the memory= hole > >>> > >>> > >>> https://chrisvoncsefalvay.com/2020/05/09/imperial-covid-model/ > >> > >> A post on comp.risks points to a different opinion, which includes a > >> discussion of why the above "review" is mistaken: > >> > >> =20 > >> https://philbull.wordpress.com/2020/05/10/why-you-can-ignore-reviews-o= f-scientific-code-by-commercial-software-developers/amp/ > >> > >> Some of the points made were already made in the comp.lang.ada > >> discussion, but there are also others. > >=20 > > (sigh) Code smells in the source code are code smells in the source > > code itself, regardless of whomever the speaker is and regardless of > > whichever imprimatur of letters do or don't follow their name. > So what? Smelly code can be correct, too. >=20 > > Niklas, you really are defending some sort of elite priesthood that > > lesser unwashed masses shall be unworthy to critique. ... Hopefully > > your URLs will spark greater productive debate instead of stifle it. >=20 > Ferguson's code can be discussed from three aspects: Correction: at least these 3 aspects. There may be more that occur to oth= er commenters. > 1. Whether the code is readable, well documented, well modularized,=20 > etc., that is, whether the code is sweet-smelling. It seems pointless to= =20 > discuss, in comp.lang.ada, these issues for a specific program, unless=20 > the program's properties are taken as examples of some general things,=20 > for example Ada-vs-C differences. It also seems pointless to discuss=20 > here Despite your best efforts to side track the issue, we are trying to discuss= topics that would be applicable to Anatoly's new Ada model, so that his do= esn't have the same defects as Ferguson's. > the practices of scientific programming in general, unless some=20 > issues relevant to Ada can be found there. >=20 > 2. Whether the code correctly implements the epidemiological models and= =20 > the particular assumptions for covid-19 that Ferguson's group has made.= =20 > This we discussed. Some bugs in the program have been found, but they=20 > appear not to have large impact on the results, at least not on the=20 > statistical results. This is clearly relevant to comp.lang.ada, as=20 > possibly illuminating the bug-resistance properties of C/C++ and Ada.=20 > However, the examples of bugs that were discussed could as well have=20 > happened in Ada as in C or C++, unless one assumes that Ada programmers= =20 > are generally more careful than C/C++ programmers. We don't need to discuss never-ending wispy cloud formations of what-if Ada= code in our imaginations anymore. We have Anatoly's extant source code to= review and suggest improvements upon. =20 > 3. Whether the epidemiological models and assumptions of Ferguson's=20 > group are correct You keep basing so many of your pronouncements on a one-size-fits-all monol= ithic definition of correctness (and that Ferguson is definitely in possess= ion of that One True And Only Correctness=E2=93=87). The entire point of h= aving so many different drastically-different (and a few similar) software = designs & implementations of hurricane models is that there are different h= orses bred for optimality on different courses. Having a plethora of diffe= rent models eventually for pandemics (e.g., Ferguson C, GitHub Ferguson C++= , Anatoly Ada, anti-Ferguson, quasi-Ferguson, and so forth) would permit se= eing where they all substantially overlap in their prediction versus what d= ifferent characteristics the outliers have. Once those characteristics of = outliers are well-understood, one can see whether the current storm or the = current pandemic actually is exhibiting those assumptions & characteristics= (and thus make the outlier the spot-on predictor as the cream of the crop)= versus not exhibiting those assumptions & characteristics (and thus damnin= g the outlier to tin-foil hat status to ignore it for this pandemic). > for SARS-COV-2 and covid-19, and whether the=20 > lock-downs are good or bad. This is entirely irrelevant to=20 > comp.lang.ada, but it seemed to be what you wanted to discuss. A deep=20 > sigh from me, too. If we can belabor the picayune details of unbounded string or some such det= ail for weeks within one Ada library, then we can discuss all sorts of aspe= cts of Anatoly's source code, design, etc in his extant Ada source code if = for no other reason than for public relations promotion of Ada in the news. As alluded to in my reply to #3 above, I believe that there is a 4th avenue= of exporation here. 4. Given that the Ferguson model is repeatedly overestimating calamity for = multiple epidemics/pandemics for over a decade now, there must be some sort= of incompleteness (if not full-fledged incorrectness/defect) in Ferguson's= model that inhibits national & international leaders from tuning it to the= situation to produce far more realistic forecasts that match the pandemic'= s actual rate of spread and fatality rate that eventually plays out in real= ity. If all the hurricane models keep predicting that all of them will be = category 5 hitting Fargo, North Dakota, then perhaps just perhaps despite m= eeting every definition of some sort of very defensible Holsti-correctness,= that something is amiss in the hurricane model(s). Likewise, having both = the GitHub rework as variant competitor and Anatoly's as rethink competitor= , the world then has the first 2 of an eventual plethora of pandemic-foreca= st models. Perhaps one of them will more closely match as forecast how rea= lity actually turned out for H3N1, H1N1, foot-&-mouth, and Mad Cow. This i= s a chance for Anatoly's to come at the problem from a somewhat different p= erspective instead of being merely a verbatim transliteration of Ferguson's= uncouth C code into more erudite Ada. And oops, both of the drastically different Ferguson uncouth C design & cod= e (or GitHub C++ evolution thereof) and Anatoly's erudite Ada design & code= might meet 2 rather different definitions of being very-defensible Holti-c= orrect. Egads! Q: But isn't that precisely what having a plethora of different hurricane/p= andemic forecasting software packages is all about? A: Multiple perspectives of correctness under differing parameters/assumpti= ons/theories/schools-of-thought/branches-of-science.