Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!mstan!amull
From: amull@Morgan.COM (Andrew P. Mullhaupt)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.wizards
Subject: Re: The *ART* of Computer Programming
Summary: How about a 'no-time' program?
Message-ID: <778@s5.Morgan.COM>
Date: 11 Mar 90 20:24:36 GMT
References: <1990Feb26.234217.23251@aucs.uucp> <732@sppy00.UUCP> <1953@ncrcce.StPaul.NCR.COM>
Organization: Morgan Stanley & Co. NY, NY
Lines: 20

On the subject of one-time programs: How about the ultimate one-time
program - the one at the end of the control tree of nuclear retaliation,
say. I would guess that this one-time (hopefully no-time) program is
fairly large, and subject to a lot of documentation and review. (But
like all programs, never enough.)

There is the (perhaps apocryphal - (apocalyptic ?)) story of the
KIM-4 microprocessor. The story goes that this chip was intended
for controlling warheads, and for this purpose, it had a special
pin, and corresponding instruction, which set this pin high. Then
the warhead was detonated. It isn't clear if the processor was
expected to get to the next instruction before being destroyed by
X rays - etc...

Also: Wouldn't the ideal operating system be a 'one-time' program?
Start it once, and it never goes down. (Not even for maintenance - 
because it's ideal... unless it's destroyed by X-rays, of course.)

Later,
Andrew Mullhaupt