TE
科技回声
首页24小时热榜最新最佳问答展示工作
GitHubTwitter
首页

科技回声

基于 Next.js 构建的科技新闻平台,提供全球科技新闻和讨论内容。

GitHubTwitter

首页

首页最新最佳问答展示工作

资源链接

HackerNews API原版 HackerNewsNext.js

© 2025 科技回声. 版权所有。

What the F-86 can teach us about software development

21 点作者 orlick超过 14 年前

8 条评论

parfe超过 14 年前
What a disappointing conclusion to an interesting historial blurb. American shot down lots of Russians because we had fly by wire planes. So Pair programming and stand up meetings are the obvious conclusion.<p>What a joke.
评论 #1709587 未加载
评论 #1709391 未加载
hassy超过 14 年前
In addition to the tenuous link between the two activities, the 10 to 1 ratio is almost certainly untrue.<p>Details here (in the main text and in cited materials):<p><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/F-86_Sabre#Korean_War" rel="nofollow">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/F-86_Sabre#Korean_War</a> <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MiG-15#Operational_history" rel="nofollow">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MiG-15#Operational_history</a><p>Isolating success in dogfights to flight controls seems like a gross oversimplification. I would like to see the original source for this (attributed to Boyd in the article).
评论 #1709786 未加载
billswift超过 14 年前
Slight nit. &#62;but because their arms didn’t tire as quickly from operating the flight controls<p>While tiring would be a factor, even if completely fresh, you can simply move a lesser weight (force) faster than a larger one.<p>Second problem is that there were multiple differences between MiGs and Sabres - the one I always heard was most significant, back when I was a teen, is that Sabres were better constructed, MiGs were more likely to fall apart from relatively light damage. So don't take <i>any</i> single article or viewpoint as <i>the truth</i> - reality is always more complex than will fit into a article or book.
评论 #1709459 未加载
pedrocr超过 14 年前
See "Boyd: The Fighter Pilot Who Changed the Art of War" for a more complete description of his life. The article doesn't do it justice.<p><a href="http://www.amazon.com/Boyd-Fighter-Pilot-Who-Changed/dp/0316796883/" rel="nofollow">http://www.amazon.com/Boyd-Fighter-Pilot-Who-Changed/dp/0316...</a>
评论 #1710631 未加载
评论 #1709475 未加载
moxiemk1超过 14 年前
This reminds me of a programming assignment from college to write a chess bot.<p>My partner and I tweaked it's understanding of how to evaluate board positions to eek out better playing ability, but the <i>major</i> improvements came from implementing a more efficient specialized game tree that let us calculate another move ahead every decision.<p>Having one more "loop" made a huge difference against our opponents; being simply smarter or better at any of the "steps in the loop" didn't help nearly as much.
saurabh超过 14 年前
&#62;&#62;Boyd realized the key advantage of the F-86 was that it’s flight controls were mechanically assisted.<p>I am guesssing what that means is it's the tools and not the process. The process is subconscious. The tools that we use, determine how fast we can iterate. Take RoR for example, or Visual Basic(F5 anyone?), developers could iterate rapidly and after a while the process faded away, but the tools remained. Maybe, developers need to play with new toys instead of following new processes.
yread超过 14 年前
Pity. I thought the article would be something like this <a href="http://etutorials.org/Programming/Software+architecture+in+practice,+second+edition/Part+One+Envisioning+Architecture/Chapter+3.+A-7E+Avionics+System+A+Case+Study+in+Utilizing+Architectural+Structures/3.3+Architecture+for+the+A-7E+Avionics+System/" rel="nofollow">http://etutorials.org/Programming/Software+architecture+in+p...</a>
callmeed超过 14 年前
Totally tangential but when I was a kid (in the 80s) there was a school/park somewhere in So Cal (I think) that had an actual F-86 on its playground (gutted of course). Whenever we road tripped on the weekend my parents would climb stop there and I'd climb up on it.