Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Current Events' started by TNHermit, Oct 29, 2013.
meh. I write code. # of lines doesn't mean anything anymore. If you have a particular routine, you slap in an include rather than write code. Doesn't matter how bloated it is. The core part of the data could probably be parsed with a program that would fit on a floppy disk. (remember those?)
Doesn't it take time to look through a large program? I don't know just asking. Another question is are typos very important. If so I suspect that it is chuck full of typos.
I wrote my first program on punch cards...(remember those?) Two of the big problems with writing an new, large application are creep, and bloat. Creep is where additional functionality is added the finished product. Bloat is where, since the are no or very little functional requirements the program increases in size, but not necessarily scope. This Ocare monster has both of these.
What little parts of the code I have seen is undoubtedly the biggest most bloated piece of trash I have seen in over 40 years. If there were requirements published (big if) they were very poor or done at the last minute.
I highly doubt there are 500 million lines of code. As shown in the infographic, that's just an absurd amount. Even if you include the .NET framework and various other reusable libraries - code that nobody working on this thing will EVER touch - it still can't be 500 million lines. Anyone who does or has ever programmed would probably agree with this.
Sounds to me like they are including in that count ALL the lines of code from EVERY system this thing interfaces with. Sure, you could probably get to 500 million for a website by taking that approach if you broaden the website to include ~20 other legacy programs that existed prior to Obama even taking office.
I have seen the source code for some of the things on that list, and linux alone is infinitely more complex than a health care website.
That said, I don't doubt for one minute the code base is bloated and poorly written.
I was thinking the same thing. This number would have to include all the interfaces and technologies used by the program, not written in the program. CGI Federal, and Xerox which did the Nevada state site, are advertising they will provide "insurance marketplace software" in the private sector as well. I'm guessing a lot of code gets copied from one project to the next, however the database(s) and portals will change in each application. With all the different database, interface, and even web-browser software out there it would be very difficult to work seamlessly across all combinations.
It's a shame the Federal Government chose to mess with the insurance industry, which isn't their jurisdiction, as compared to specifying a clean, universal interface which is in their jurisdiction. A published interface would reduce the actual cost of applications, and empower consumers.
A. No one understood the difficulty of designing with requirements to that many (each customized hundreds of times) legacy programs... therefore they half-assed it. Has it EVER been done before? Without upgrading the legacies first??
B. I'm going to bet that the requirements changed WEEKLY as someone else insisted on functionality from front-end to back that no one thought of in the original design... as a way to Cover their exposed backsides...
Step one would've been to normalize all the underlying systems (a 5 yr project, most likely at gov's usual pace). So that they were consistent in basic features and functionality...
THEN, one could build the front end. And one would ALSO begin to deal with the problem of exporting relevant data to the insurance companies who are using their own proprietary-designed systems... sigh. ***
I'm guessing here: work has JUST begun on the IRS systems to account for the verification of income, amount of subsidy, and consequent penalty - if any? How about the employer reporting systems? [Lets just go on and crash the IRS system in the process of building that - the US gov doesn't care how much money it receives in revenues daily... sigh...]
Honestly, a project of this magnitude - even if it were well-designed from the get-go, and problems simulated and solved as part of the design process, could be expected to raise continual glitches and outages. What happens when one of the legacy systems is upgraded in the future???
Even when upgrading EVERYTHING involved, all at once -- things popup and require awkward work-arounds and "make-dos". The pipedream of integrating data from multiple sources into some dashboard type AI brain... is still a pipedream, Watson notwithstanding.
*** PS: and then there are the encryption and security issues and ID validation protocols at every step along the way...
Oh well with another trillion dollars and by the end of November everything will be working properly. All you need to do is say your name and out spits the proper insurance.
Like everything else the government does, there probably twice as much code as it needs.
Nahhh. I gotta call BS on this one. Up and down that chart are systems that in their disparity show that one person's line of code isn't the same as the next. Besides, ten zillion lines of code doesn't account for the simplest of things not working.
Ok. Here is my theory for the magnitude of the number: they included the text of the Obamacare law as string literals in the code. Then they wrote a spider program to crawl the text to count the lines of code (this was probably a performance metric in their no-bid contract) Because of the endless self-referencing clauses in the law, the spider got lost in an endless loop. After burning precious cycles on the healthcare.gov servers waiting for the program to finish, they finally killed the spider...30 days after starting it.
Lol. 10 likes, especially if they used a "bubble sort". O(n^n).
Sent from my HTC6500LVW using Homesteading Today mobile app
maybe it has been sabotaged on purpose.
Heard on the news late this evening that only 6 people had signed up from one state and in some states only 30 or 40 more.
The web site is only set up for 6 at a time. At that rate not everybody will be able to get coverage in the next 100 years.