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=-0.8 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_DATE
	autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!usc!sdd.hp.com!decwrl!ucbvax!grebyn.com!karl
From: karl@grebyn.com (Karl A. Nyberg)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Ada Waivers
Message-ID: <9008250931.AA05641@grebyn.com>
Date: 25 Aug 90 09:31:39 GMT
Sender: usenet@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU
Organization: The Internet
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

I think the best approach to take is not that of a waiver but of a variance.
I think you'll have a tough time getting an entire project exempted from
using Ada these days.  If you had already selected your hardware AND there
weren't any Ada compilers for it, you might have a better chance.  However,
since the hardware you mention (1750A) has plenty of compilers available,
it's not likely.  You can get an exception, or variance, for parts of the
software, such as interfaces to outside packages or hardware, vital
performance loops, etc. but don't look to get a complete waiver -- they're
nigh on impossible to get these days.

The best approach is to show how you're doing some 90-odd percent of the
system in Ada already and show how the part for which you're requesting a
variance is limited to a small section of the code, one that is well defined
and fits into a single low level unit in whatever design approach you're
using.  This limits the long-term life-cycle maintenance effect, which is
one of the major concerns when applying for not using Ada.

-- Karl --