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=0.7 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,MSGID_RANDY
	autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 103376,a5f5c736e8fed0b4
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2001-01-31 07:40:11 PST
Path: 
 supernews.google.com!sn-xit-02!supernews.com!nntp-relay.ihug.net!ihug.co.nz!newsfeed.mesh.ad.jp!nntp1.njy.teleglobe.net!teleglobe.net!news.stealth.net!news.maxwell.syr.edu!nntp2.deja.com!nnrp1.deja.com!not-for-mail
From: Dewi Daniels <dewid@praxis-cs.co.uk>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: Ravenscar Profile and SIL
Date: Wed, 31 Jan 2001 15:34:00 GMT
Organization: Deja.com
Message-ID: <959b97$f3q$1@nnrp1.deja.com>
References: <3a6ec2e0$1@pull.gecm.com> <3a6f0c44$1@pull.gecm.com>
 <3a702206$1@pull.gecm.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 193.195.213.130
X-Article-Creation-Date: Wed Jan 31 15:34:00 2001 GMT
X-Http-User-Agent: Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 4.01; Windows NT)
X-Http-Proxy: 1.0 NTS40ENT03, 1.0 NTS40ENT01,
 1.0 x68.deja.com:80 (Squid/1.1.22) for client 193.195.213.130
X-MyDeja-Info: XMYDJUIDdewi
Xref: supernews.google.com comp.lang.ada:4762
Date: 2001-01-31T15:34:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

In article <3a702206$1@pull.gecm.com>,
  "Brian Jepson" <Brian.Jepson@baesystems.com> wrote:
> In Def. Stan. 00-56 it is the safety functions that are allocated
SILs, so whilst some of the
> functions implemented using the Ravenscar Profile might have a SIL3
requirement it is bad
> terminology to call the comonents of the implementation SIL3.

To be pedantic, DEF STAN 00-56 does require both abstract functions and
components to be allocated safety integrity levels (see 7.4.2). I agree
that allocating SILs to the safety functions is the fundamental part of
the whole process, since the component SILs are derived from the
function SILs (albeit in a slightly complicated way, see 7.4.8).

I also agree that it makes no sense in a DEF STAN 00-56 context to
refer to a S3 operating system or run-time per se, since in DEF STAN 00-
56, a safety integrity level only makes sense when applied to a
specific set of safety functions and safety properties.


Sent via Deja.com
http://www.deja.com/