The Sketchiest Code I've Ever Seen: The CaRMa Disaster

As a seasoned software engineer, I've encountered some truly egregious examples of code. The most egregious example, however, still stands out in my memory. This story revolves around a significant software engineering disaster known as BAD CaRMa, a project that resulted in hundreds of man-hours of wasted effort and millions of dollars in damages. Let's dive into the details of this unfortunate incident.

Background: The CaRMa Project

CaRMa stands for CAlculating Routine Myocardial Axial load. CaRMa is a medical software application designed to calculate and analyze myocardial loads, a critical aspect of cardiovascular health assessment. The project was initiated to provide a more accurate and efficient way to diagnose and treat heart-related issues.

The Developer and His Challenges

The primary developer of the CaRMa software was a self-taught programmer, which is both admirable and problematic. Self-taught programmers, while passionate and eager to learn, often lack formal training and best practices. In the case of the CaRMa project, this lack of formal training and best practices led to a series of coding disasters.

Code Quality Issues

The .c file containing the entire application was a horrifying example of poor code quality. The file spanned several thousand lines and was a complete spaghetti code mess. The code was filled with unnecessary goto statements, and the logic was convoluted and difficult to follow. Here is a snippet to illustrate the chaos:

int main() {
    int x  0;
    int y  1;
    int z  2;
    while (z  1000) {
        goto label1;
        z  ;
    }
label1:
    if (x  y) {
        goto label2;
    }
label2:
    if (y  z) {
        goto label3;
    }
label3:
    if (z  1000) {
        goto label1;
    }
    return 0;
}

This example highlights the lack of proper control structures, leading to an over-reliance on goto statements. The entire codebase was a nightmare for anyone trying to maintain or extend the application.

The Human Cost

The consequences of this poorly written code were severe. The project was initially managed by a small team within a key NASA center. Due to the low quality of the code, the project was soon transferred to a larger team at NASA’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL). This led to a significant shift in the dynamics and a major increase in the budget, which eventually escalated to $50 million before the project was completely scrapped in 2006.

Faults and Misconceptions

There were several key faults and misconceptions that contributed to the disaster:

1. Incorrect Assumptions: The original programmer made incorrect assumptions about how the software would be used, leading to a design that did not meet users' needs. 2. Lack of Best Practices: The self-taught nature of the programmer meant that they did not adhere to industry best practices, such as using clear and maintainable code structures. 3. Poor Communication: The transfer of the project to JPL led to communication breakdowns and a lack of shared understanding.

These issues highlighted the importance of proper documentation, thorough testing, and clear communication within a development team.

Lessons and Takeaways

While the CaRMa disaster is an extreme example, it serves as a cautionary tale for all software engineers. It underscores the importance of:

Formal Training: Employing well-trained and experienced software engineers can prevent such disasters. Software development is a complex field, and lack of formal training can lead to critical oversights. Code Reviews: Regular code reviews can help catch issues early, even if the initial developer is self-taught. Peer reviews can provide valuable insights and improve code quality. Documentation: Proper documentation of code and project requirements is crucial. It helps maintain consistency and ensures that new team members can understand the project easily.

Ultimately, the CaRMa disaster serves as a reminder of the consequences of poor code quality and the importance of best practices in software development.

Conclusion

The CaRMa project stands as a stark reminder of the importance of professionalism, adherence to best practices, and the critical role of documentation and clear communication in software engineering. By learning from such failures, we can strive to prevent similar disasters in the future and deliver higher-quality software to our users.