Martian Horrors 👽

As a programmer, I often deal with “air castles”: I write code that works with very abstract concepts.

Suddenly I came across a video, where they analyze source code of software for NASA rovers (nasa/fprime).

The first 15 minutes of the video is a dull overview of CI and inhouse .bash-scripts used for builds. There we learn that according to the evaluation of an authoritative lgtm analyzer the repository contains top-quality C/C++ code, marked as A+.

But then we see a vigorous mix of C89 and C++11 and some great examples of code smell. There you can see:

• Inhouse awkward string and vector implementations.
• Strange code like this:

  ObjBase::~ObjBase() {} // why not `~ObjBase() = default`?
  void resetSer(void);
  ExternalSerializeBuffer(ExternalSerializeBuffer& other);
  ExternalSerializeBuffer(ExternalSerializeBuffer* other);
  const char* operator=(const char* src);
  (void)snprintf(buffer, size, ...
  

• reinterpret_cast used in 169 places.
• Constants are declared via enums.

Comments on the video are more interesting than the video itself – employees of companies like the European Space Agency confirm the awkward level of programming in “scientific” and “state” spheres.