F-35 Code Leak: Engineers Skeptical Over Usefulness; Programmers Fight Over C++ vs. JavaScript Definitions
The core discussion splits into two unrelated camps: the feasibility of weapon system reverse-engineering and the technical definition of programming languages. On the hardware side, consensus suggests leaked F-35 code would be unusable for direct flight control due to massive data loads (375 TB) and engineering complexity like replicating sensor inputs.
When discussing programming languages, the division is stark. Side A argues JavaScript/TypeScript qualify as true programming languages regardless of their 'scripting' label. Side B digs in, insisting only languages compiled directly to machine code, like C++, count. Further nitpicking includes users like Redkey calling out alleged C++ flaws as mere documented standards, while litchralee uses Java and Lisp to dismantle the compiler-only test for language validity.
The weight of opinion shows massive code volume is more reflective of Cold War-era 'Manhattan Project' style work—compartmentalization—than pure technical inadequacy. The fault lines remain the debate over compilation methodology versus core capability, and whether criticizing specific language features constitutes deep technical analysis or just overhyped ranting.
Key Points
Leaked F-35 code is too large and complex to be easily usable for flight control.
The consensus points to dataset sizes of 375 TB and the difficulty of modeling real-world failure modes.
Defining a programming language purely by its compilation process is flawed.
litchralee cited Java (bytecode) and Lisp to counter the 'must compile to machine code' rule.
JavaScript/TypeScript are valid programming languages despite their 'scripting' veneer.
This is the core philosophical divide between proponents and purists of compiled languages.
The massive size of such military codebases reflects historical workarounds, not necessarily modern limitations.
JustSo suggested 'Manhattan Project style strategies' caused the complexity, which is surprisingly relevant today.
Critiques of C++ technical features (like random number generation) are often overblown.
Redkey challenged the critique by pointing out these alleged flaws are documented standard features.
Source Discussions (3)
This report was synthesized from the following Lemmy discussions, ranked by community score.