Skip to content
0:00 / 0:00

#poweroften#safety-critical#assertions

The Power of Ten: Rules for Safety Critical Coding by Gerard Holzmann

TigerBeetle

14K subscribers • 9 videos on Hallway

YouTube
  • Recommended by 2 people: 1 on Lobsters and 1 in engineering communities.
  • Presented by Gerard Holzmann, computer scientist
  • Linked in the descriptionSlides on tigerbeetle.github.io
  • An opinion. It argues one side of a question engineers disagree on.

Intermediate. Assumes working knowledge.

13K views2 months ago2 recommendations

Software designTools and practiceSoftware architectureTestingDebugging

Gerard Holzmann explains the Power of Ten rules for safety-critical software development, emphasizing static allocation, assertions, and metrics.

NASA's Power of Ten Rules for Safety-Critical Code by Gerard Holzmann—static allocation, assertions and explicit limits—are intrinsic to TigerStyle and it was a joy to have Gerard himself at Systems Distributed! Introduction Software safety related standards Strong risk awareness Basics The importance of collecting metrics -- the single most important thing you can do Defect prevention strategies Cataloguing software anomalies in space missions; observations and survey results Effective compliance for coding rules Simple principles The power of ten ruleset (2006) Initial responses per rule (and external blog posts discussing rules!) and growing support Assertion density Using assertions makes a measurable difference Consequences for breaking the build Cobra Talk from Systems Distributed '26: systemsdistributed.com x.com/gh_spin Slides: tigerbeetle.github.io/slides/sd/2026/Gerard%20Holzmann/The%2…

Why it's here

2 people recommend this

What people say. Recommended for its insights into safety-critical coding rules and the empirical data supporting the use of assertions.

typesanitizeron Lobsters • Recommends

The Power of Ten: Rules for Safety Critical Coding

u/DrShockerin r/programming • Recommends

On “NASA has a list of 10 rules for software development”

I'm surprised you feel that way about 2 and 3. idk why I'm looking at such old comments but I recently saw this and was curious about people's opinions online. I think it's funny that their data seems to show the usefulness of a rule is approximately inversely proportional to how much people aree with the rule. You might find it interesting to watch since you asked "why 2 asserts" link to this video