Re: Safety-Critical Systems Developed Using C++

[Marin David Condic <mcondic.auntie.spam@acm.org>]

I'll be the *last* one to claim that Ada doesn't enhance reliability and reduce risk. I hope that's
clear. My statement that it is possible to write reliable software in C relates more to the fact
that there are more ways of insuring correctness than just compiler/language features. For example,
extensive code-reads, thorough unit testing, integration testing, language preprocessors (lint?)
automated test tools, various forms of analysis, etc. all figure in to building a reliable piece of
software. If I don't have language support, I can rely more heavily on some of the other available
tools. Albeit, at considerably more expense. And therein lies the rub. If it costs lots more to
insure reliability in C then there is less likelihood it will get done.

I'm still a proponent of the notion that in safety critical systems, Ada should be used where
possible. Its just that you don't always have this capability. And let's remember that there were
safety critical systems that were written in assembly language and they worked fine too. So it *can*
be done. Just not as easily.

MDC

Larry Kilgallen wrote:

> As a customer (victim?) rather than provider of air travel,
> I am less interested in the theoretical possibility of
> getting it right and much more concerned about what the
> probability is they got it right on some particular plane.

--
======================================================================
Marin David Condic - Quadrus Corporation - http://www.quadruscorp.com/
Send Replies To: m c o n d i c @ q u a d r u s c o r p . c o m
Visit my web site at:  http://www.mcondic.com/

    "I'd trade it all for just a little more"
        --  Charles Montgomery Burns, [4F10]
======================================================================