Re: Runtime check : what about you ?

[Niklas Holsti <niklas.holsti@tidorum.invalid>]

Adam Beneschan wrote:
> On Jun 17, 10:53 am, Jeffrey Carter
> <spam.jrcarter....@spam.not.acm.org> wrote:
>> On 06/17/2011 02:42 AM, Yannick Duch�ne (Hibou57) wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>> Just out of curiosity as much as because this may be worth to discuss it to some
>>> (at least because there are some reflex with that) : how many of your typically
>>> compile releases with runtime check and how many of you typically compile
>>> releases without runtime check ?
>> The description of the language in the ARM includes run-time checks. If checks
>> are turned off, then you're using some other language, not Ada.
> 
> Then I guess the RM sections on the Suppress pragma must be a big fat
> misprint.  Obviously, they're rogue pages that sneaked into the RM
> from the standard for some other language.
> 
> Really, I don't see the point of statements like that.  Ada is a tool,
> to be used for practical purposes.  It's not a religion.  And it was
> certainly part of the intent of Ada's designers that developers would
> develop their programs with checking turned on but then turn it off
> after the program has been tested and is ready to be put into
> production.  It's interesting to me that no one here has admitted
> doing this;

We effectively did that in my preceding Ada project (the platform 
on-board SW for the GOCE satellite) where we tested on a workstation 
using native compilation with checks on, but released cross-compiled 
target code with checks off. The target compiler does not support 
standard exception handling so we did not even have to think about 
whether and how we could have handled check failures on the target. (We 
did of course run the tests on the target, too, not just on the 
workstation.)

-- 
Niklas Holsti
Tidorum Ltd
niklas holsti tidorum fi
       .      @       .