On 3/13/15, Ron W <ronw.m...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Fri, Mar 13, 2015 at 4:08 PM, Graeme Pietersz <gra...@pietersz.net> > wrote: > >> I am rather stunned (and a tad concerned) that cars need 100m lines of >> code. > > > Cars don't really need that much code.
The version controlled codebase might be ~5% "running code" and ~95% tests and documentation though, which would explain a large repo. > A luxury car could have electronic > control modules in a lot of places you might not think of. I know I was > surprised years ago when I happened to be in Detroit during the North > American International Auto Show. One of the exhibits was a full sized, > clear plastic model of a car with the wiring harnesses and control modules. > Front to back, there was a front end lighting controller, front end > suspension controller, engine, ignition and transmission controllers, ABS > controller, instrument cluster, Heat/ventilation/AC, interior lighting and > entertainment system controllers, a memory-power-mirror controller in the 2 > side mirrors, a memory-power-seat controller in the 2 front seats, a power > window and lock controller in the 4 doors, an overhead (sunroof and > redundant controls for HVAC and entertainment systems) controller, back end > lighting controller and back end suspension controller. All those modules > have tiny computers each needing it's own software. Probably the > entertainment system controller has the most software, then the engine > controller. > > By comparison, my "grunt" car has engine, ignition, transmission and ABS > controllers, an instrument cluster, a "remote keyless entry" controller and > a radio/CD player unit. A lot less code. Probably the engine controller has > the most software, then the radio/CD unit. > _______________________________________________ fossil-users mailing list fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users
