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=0.2 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID, REPLYTO_WITHOUT_TO_CC autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: fac41,2c6139ce13be9980 X-Google-Attributes: gidfac41,public X-Google-Thread: 103376,3d3f20d31be1c33a X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-Thread: 1108a1,2c6139ce13be9980 X-Google-Attributes: gid1108a1,public X-Google-Thread: f43e6,2c6139ce13be9980 X-Google-Attributes: gidf43e6,public From: Ken Garlington Subject: Re: Safety-critical development in Ada and Eiffel Date: 1997/08/19 Message-ID: <33FA7574.13B3@flash.net>#1/1 X-Deja-AN: 268132407 References: <33E9ADE9.4709@flash.net> <33F133D7.71AC@erols.com> <33F25933.7F83@flash.net> <33F27B5C.6A3C@erols.com> <33F44261.7BD3@flash.net> <33F527C8.32B3@erols.com> <33F5D274.30C4@flash.net> <33F7D014.70B5@erols.com> Reply-To: Ken.Garlington@computer.org Organization: Flashnet Communications, http://www.flash.net Newsgroups: comp.object,comp.software-eng,comp.lang.ada,comp.lang.eiffel Date: 1997-08-19T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: Ted Velkoff wrote: > > Forget about Eiffel for a moment, and consider Ada. I'm starting to > think that the approach being advocated would suggest using "pragma > Supress" throughout the entire development cycle, starting with unit > test. Without ever having tried to do things that way, it seems on the > surface that it would be harder to detect and correct bugs in the early > going. Isn't there some amount of run-time checking that is appropriate > during development even if it is turned off later? Only if you believe the benefits outweigh the penalties described in my paper. I have delivered Ada systems where checking was never enabled, and where the "assertions" were checked using non-intrusive debugger commands. Of course, I still got the benefit of the static checking, which (usually) exists even if the run-time code is suppressed. Note that, for non-safety-critical code written in Ada, I have delivered the code where the checks were left on in the production system. Again, this is a very narrowly-focused domain we are discussing (which just happens to potentially include the Ariane 5 IRS). > > -- Ted Velkoff