From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,a3ca574fc2007430 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public From: james@cdac.com (James Thiele) Subject: Re: Ada and Automotive Industry Date: 1996/11/11 Message-ID: <1996Nov11.180438.19361@ole.cdac.com>#1/1 X-Deja-AN: 195889537 sender: news@ole.cdac.com (Usenet News) organization: Cascade Design Automation, Bellevue, WA newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Date: 1996-11-11T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: "Paul E. Bennett" writes: >In article <3280DA96.15FB@hso.link.com> > s_allen@hso.link.com "Stanley R. Allen" writes: > >> You would think that Tartan >> (now TI) or DDC-I, or one of the other cross-development >> Ada vendors would be able to make inroads in that >> environment. Top-tier Ada vendors have the editors, >> compilers, safety-certified kernels, debuggers, cross- >> development toolsets, etc. that are needed for the >> kind of development done by auto makers. > >[%X] > >> Once you appreciate the problems that Ada was designed >> to solve, you appreciate the solutions it provides. >> And as the auto industry relies more and more on >> embedded software, it should begin to look at Ada >> and appreciate it more. > >>From the stories I have heard from various people who have used Ada in Safety >Related Applications work it would seem that only a restricted sub-set of Ada >is permissible in such applications (SPARK being one such subset). This is >also supported by evidence of two Ada Compilers that would produce different >results for the same expression of a calculation and same numerical input. > I coauthored a pair of documents on the use of Ada in flight-critical avionics and we called for using a restricted subset of Ada. -- James Thiele james@cdac.com (work) or jet@eskimo.com (home) http://www.eskimo.com/~jet