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: 103376,323f382d1271f5b6 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public From: Brian Rogoff Subject: Re: Safety Critical Systems and Ada 95 Date: 1998/06/11 Message-ID: #1/1 X-Deja-AN: 361898139 References: <357EB552.5CF3EB9@swl.msd.ray.com> <6lmm4o$n57$1@gte2.gte.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-Trace: 897620388 21526 bpr 206.184.139.132 Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Date: 1998-06-11T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: On Wed, 10 Jun 1998, Rakesh Malhotra wrote: > John J Cupak Jr, CCP wrote: > > > > I know Ada 95 has a Safety Annex, but has anyone actually used > > it to implement a real (or even example) system? > > > > Are there any specific reports or papers on the Safety features > > of Ada 95 (other than RM95 or the Rationale)? > > > Have not used the Annex. I do not know of papers that deal specifically > with safety and the Ada95 annex H however regarding the safety features > of Ada in general, there are quite a few available documents: > > ... snip ... In the May 13 issue of "Electronic Design", the EDA watch section is about the use of Ada 95 as a hardware/software codesign language, and has some discussion of Annex H and a subset based on intersecting with the VHDL reserved word set. While some of the details sounded goofy to me, I think the general idea is quite good. There is a lot of talk about Java as such a language, but Ada is clearly better. -- Brian