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=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,87e8cfe2f62264db X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 1995-02-06 08:40:15 PST Path: swrinde!howland.reston.ans.net!swiss.ans.net!butch!cliffy.lfwc.lockheed.com!cliffy.lfwc.lockheed.com!l107353 From: l107353@cliffy.lfwc.lockheed.com (Garlington KE) Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: Ada Run-time for embedded systems Date: 6 Feb 1995 16:16:39 GMT Organization: Lockheed Fort Worth Company Message-ID: <3h5i17$o38@cliffy.lfwc.lockheed.com> References: <3gjffe$f4f@cliffy.lfwc.lockheed.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: 134.189.143.19 X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2] Date: 1995-02-06T16:16:39+00:00 List-Id: Robert I. Eachus (eachus@spectre.mitre.org) wrote: : Of course this gives a whole new meaning to "safety-critical : real-time applications." Proving to the customers satisfaction that a : glitch in the LAN won't launch ordinance is only part of the : problem--you have to prove also that it won't prevent the launch when : needed. For anti-missile weapons, both are safety critical as well as : mission critical. Interesting. In most of the projects I've worked, the latter case would not be considered "safety-critical" as the ability to respond against a threat is groundruled out of the definition. However, a denial of service situation would be considered security-critical... -------------------------------------------------------------------- Ken Garlington GarlingtonKE@lfwc.lockheed.com F-22 Computer Resources Lockheed Fort Worth Co. If LFWC or the F-22 program has any opinions, they aren't telling me.