Re: ObjectAda - no clock drift!

[dennison@telepath.com]

In article <6m7r5m$4gn$1@usenet.rational.com>,
  "Corey Ashford" <corSPAMey@rational.com> wrote:
>
>
> dennison@telepath.com wrote in message <6m6f0t$1ue$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com>...
> >The Ada rm in D.8 paragraph 41-43 requires vendors to give "an upper bound
> on
> >the drift rate of Clock with respect to real time." I was curious what my
...
> >has the following statement:  There is no software clock drift.
.
> I think it's saying that the way the software is written, it will not cause
> the current
> time to drift as a side-effect of the way it keeps time the way some
> algorithms do.  However, if the hardware clock drifts, it has no control
> over that.

Ahh. I think my confusion came from assuming they were answering the question
that was asked. :-)

The RM says "An upper bound on the drift rate of Clock with respect to REAL
TIME." (emphasis mine) Aonix gave me an answer with respect to the system
clock. Those are clearly not the same thing. So someone looking here for
Clock's drift rate with respect to real time will not get it.

In all fairness to Aonix, there's no way they could know what the clock drift
rate for the hardware in any particular PC is. But they should have said that,
rather than answering half the question in an incredibly terse manner.

I guess I was mostly posting this to see if this is a just a farcical non-
compliance with the documentation standard, or if I'm misunderstanding the
standard. There are several other examples I could site, but this one was the
funniest. From the seriousness of the responses I'm getting, it looks like
this level of "compliance" is probably typical. Its annoying to think that
I'm going to have to stop and analyze all their answers now to make sure they
are really answering the question that was asked.

T.E.D.

-----== Posted via Deja News, The Leader in Internet Discussion ==-----
http://www.dejanews.com/   Now offering spam-free web-based newsreading