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-Thread: 103376,b860b4e8d00468ef
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
Path: 
 g2news1.google.com!news2.google.com!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!not-for-mail
From: "Martin Dowie" <martin.dowie@baesystems.com>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: Ada access vs C/C++ pointers and references
Date: Thu, 19 Aug 2004 08:42:33 +0100
Organization: BAE SYSTEMS
Message-ID: <412458a0$1_1@baen1673807.greenlnk.net>
References: <b47de02.0408181427.25d82fe1@posting.google.com>
 <87657fso10.fsf@insalien.org> <10i8l6dadu067a1@corp.supernews.com>
X-Trace: news.uni-berlin.de To+Z/T/QILgT5FB67WKNUgBzGHZ0fwKLb1QNNKVjuVGT4Nd1hK
X-Orig-Path: baen1673807.greenlnk.net!baen1673807!not-for-mail
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4807.1700
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4807.1700
X-Original-NNTP-Posting-Host: baen1673807.greenlnk.net
Xref: g2news1.google.com comp.lang.ada:2839
Date: 2004-08-19T08:42:33+01:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

j wrote:
> Hey avionics guys, please share your knowledge and experience,
>
> I am starting a new job - Ada in avionics.
>
> Any suggestions or recommendations for: what to know,  first thing to
> study if you don't know, training books, pitfalls to watch for,
> 'soft' skills?

Here's 5 off the top of my head:

KISS (Keep It Simple, Stupid). Try and avoid the more esoterique corners of
the language (e.g. I can't imagine myself every using ATC). Investigate
SPARK - this will certainly keep it KISS! :-) Also, check out the
"Ravenscar" profile for tasking programs (SPARK can support this now).

Never be tempted to export variables instead of using an access routine
(pragma Inline is your friend).

If you can, make sure _you_ have input to the ICD so that you ensure message
have nice field boundaries.

Avoid 'holey' enumerations, other than at the boundary and always convert
them to a 'plain' enumeration.

Avoid 'types packages' - by this I mean enormous packages that hold every
type required by a system.

Cheers

-- Martin