From: merlin@annwfn.com (Fred McCall)
Subject: Re: DoD STD-2167A?
Date: Sat, 24 Sep 1994 14:38:30 -0400
Date: 1994-09-24T14:38:30-04:00 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <85BA3244E26@annwfn.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: 35mqdo$gqt@theopolis.orl.mmc.com
In <35mqdo$gqt@theopolis.orl.mmc.com> dennison@romulus23.DAB.GE.COM Ted Dennison writes:
>Of course, being an Adaphile, I believe 2167A's emphasis on quality IMPLIES
>a use of Ada.
Not to mention its insistence on reams of meaningless verbosity in the
way of documentation. I will merely note that there is a strong move to
do away with requirement of 2167A compliance and have DoD go to 'best
commercial practice' in order to try to get costs down out of the
stratosphere; I will leave the corollery back to Ada to someone else
(but it certainly seems to apply).
--
"Insisting on perfect safety is for people who don't have the balls to live
in the real world." -- Mary Shafer, NASA Ames Dryden
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
merlin@annwfn.com -- I don't speak for others and they don't speak for me.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~1994-09-24 18:38 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
1994-09-20 8:32 DoD STD-2167A? Dani Schnider
1994-09-20 14:08 ` Ted Dennison
1994-09-24 18:38 ` Fred McCall [this message]
1994-09-26 4:33 ` Rod Cheshire
1994-09-28 2:20 ` Lee_Robert_Willis
1994-09-28 4:25 ` Wanted: Ada for OS/2 Scot A.C. Gould
1994-09-22 21:55 ` DoD STD-2167A? TOM
replies disabled
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox