comp.lang.ada
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: cronan@sydney.DIALix.oz.au (Mark Cronan)
Subject: DOD-STD-1679A(Navy)
Date: 7 Mar 1995 13:02:27 +1000
Date: 1995-03-07T13:02:27+10:00	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <3jgic3$q3g$1@sydney.DIALix.oz.au> (raw)

Hi,

I am working on a project which, alas is using DOD-STD-1679A.  The project
is being done in ADA but the question is comming up, what is the
interpretation of the phrase "machine instruction words".  Paragraph
5.10.3 of the standard uses this phrase to define the number of allowable
problems in the software at acceptance.  Has anyone out there worked on an
ADA project which has addressed this problem? Or know someone I can get in
contact with who does know? 


Thanks
Mark




             reply	other threads:[~1995-03-07  3:02 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
1995-03-07  3:02 Mark Cronan [this message]
1995-03-07  4:50 ` DOD-STD-1679A(Navy) verne
1995-03-08 12:44 ` DOD-STD-1679A(Navy) Doc Elliott
1995-03-09 17:05   ` DOD-STD-1679A(Navy) Garlington KE
1995-03-18  1:30     ` DOD-STD-1679A(Navy) Scott . Smart CDR
     [not found] ` <3jkddt$mk1@michp1.redstone.army. <50716@suned1.Nswses.Navy.MIL>
1995-03-21 18:12   ` DOD-STD-1679A(Navy) Doc Elliott
1995-03-23 12:23     ` DOD-STD-1679A(Navy) Mike Meier
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
1995-03-10 14:52 DOD-STD-1679A(Navy) Jeff Seigle
1995-03-10 15:37 ` DOD-STD-1679A(Navy) Garlington KE
1995-03-11  4:22 ` DOD-STD-1679A(Navy) verne

replies disabled
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox