[Haskell-cafe] Knight Capital debacle and software correctness
jays at panix.com
Sat Aug 4 19:47:24 CEST 2012
On Sat, 4 Aug 2012, Jake McArthur <jake.mcarthur at gmail.com> wrote:
> I feel like this thread is kind of surreal. Knight Capital's mistake
> was to use imperative programming styles? An entire industry is
> suffering because they haven't universally applied category theory to
> software engineering and live systems? Am I just a victim of a small
> - Jake
ad application of category theory: No joke.
Atul Gawande's book The Checklist Manifesto deals with some of
In related news, for every type t of Haskell is it the case that
something called "_|_" is an object of the type?
> On Sat, Aug 4, 2012 at 12:46 PM, Jay Sulzberger <jays at panix.com> wrote:
>> On Sat, 4 Aug 2012, Vasili I. Galchin <vigalchin at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Hello Haskell Group,
>>> I work in mainstream software industry.
>>> I am going to make an assumption .... except for Jane Street
>>> Capital all/most "Wall Street" software is written in an imperative
>>> Assuming this why is Wall Street not awaken to the dangers. As I
>>> write, Knight Capital may not survive the weekend.
>> I believe this particular mild error was in part due to a failure
>> to grasp and apply category theory. There are several systems here:
>> 1. The design of the code.
>> 2. The coding of the code.
>> 3. The testing of the code.
>> 4. The live running of the code.
>> 5. The watcher systems which watch the live running.
>> If the newspaper reports are to be believed, the watcher systems,
>> all of them, failed. Or there was not even one watcher system
>> observing/correcting/halting at the time of running.
>> Category theory suggests that all of these systems are worthy of
>> study, and that these systems have inter-relations, which are
>> just as worthy of study.
>> Haskell-Cafe mailing list
>> Haskell-Cafe at haskell.org
More information about the Haskell-Cafe