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=-1.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID
	autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 115aec,f41f1f25333fa601
X-Google-Attributes: gid115aec,public
X-Google-Thread: 103376,a3ca574fc2007430
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
From: bobduff@world.std.com (Robert A Duff)
Subject: Re: Ada and Automotive Industry
Date: 1996/12/02
Message-ID: <E1szLH.3Mq@world.std.com>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 201934934
references: <55ea3g$m1j@newsbf02.news.aol.com> <dewar.849073914@merv>
 <Pine.GSO.3.95.961129151026.24389C-100000@nunic.nu.edu>
 <BPE6pDAXsXoyEwAm@phaedsys.demon.co.uk>
organization: The World Public Access UNIX, Brookline, MA
newsgroups: comp.lang.ada,comp.realtime
Date: 1996-12-02T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>


In article <BPE6pDAXsXoyEwAm@phaedsys.demon.co.uk>,
Chris Hills  <chris@phaedsys.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>I am ammussed by the comment "for saftey reasons" ADA is no safer than
>any other language. It is only safer in theroy. It depends on the
>standard of the compilers and tools etc. 
>
>I believe that at the current time there are nearly 2000 requests for
>clarification on the ADA standard. This is 2000 places where
>implimentors of tools are not sure what the standard means or have
>dissagreed over implimentation. Therefore no two ADA compilers are
>guaranteed to produce the same output.

I am amused by the number "2000".  There are, in fact, 174 "Ada Issues",
which are the rulings, or pending rulings, on the current Ada standard.
Of these, 69 are considered bugs in the Standard document.  (Others are
editorial comments, cases where the question has an obvious answer, and
so forth).

The Ada Issues are publicly available from sw-eng.falls-church.va.us.

- Bob