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=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham
	autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Thread: a07f3367d7,16f1030bd366bf59
X-Google-Attributes: gida07f3367d7,public,usenet
X-Google-NewGroupId: yes
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII
Path: 
 g2news1.google.com!news1.google.com!postnews.google.com!o3g2000yqb.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
From: Ludovic Brenta <ludovic@ludovic-brenta.org>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: About the F-22 software bug
Date: Fri, 5 Feb 2010 00:52:45 -0800 (PST)
Organization: http://groups.google.com
Message-ID: <ace0aacb-e940-4595-9828-c83be90d5d16@o3g2000yqb.googlegroups.com>
References: <4b6b15d2$0$929$ba4acef3@news.orange.fr>
 <4YKdnVFQX_suIPbWnZ2dnUVZ_rednZ2d@earthlink.com>
	<3050ef55-5dde-40ed-8a8f-a2daf245bf86@k19g2000yqc.googlegroups.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 153.98.68.197
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Trace: posting.google.com 1265359965 29422 127.0.0.1 (5 Feb 2010 08:52:45
 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com
NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 5 Feb 2010 08:52:45 +0000 (UTC)
Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com
Injection-Info: o3g2000yqb.googlegroups.com; posting-host=153.98.68.197;
	posting-account=pcLQNgkAAAD9TrXkhkIgiY6-MDtJjIlC
User-Agent: G2/1.0
X-HTTP-UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.9.1.7)
	Gecko/20091221 Firefox/3.5.7,gzip(gfe),gzip(gfe)
Xref: g2news1.google.com comp.lang.ada:8902
Date: 2010-02-05T00:52:45-08:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

Martin wrote on comp.lang.ada:
> On Feb 5, 6:42=A0am, Dennis Lee Bieber <wlfr...@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
> > On Thu, 04 Feb 2010 19:46:15 +0100, Pascal Obry <pas...@obry.net>
> > declaimed the following in comp.lang.ada:
> > > I know that the F-22 is 90% of Ada. Is there some public information
> > > about this bug? Is that a design bug?
>
> > =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 So far as I recall -- from some years ago -- it was an =
algorithm
> > problem handling position information wrap-around from crossing, as
> > mentioned, the International Dateline... -180.0 to +180.0 deg longitude=
.
>
> > =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 I didn't hear that they had to follow the tankers back =
-- was under
> > the impression once they managed to cross back heading east a reboot of
> > the navigation system started working again...
>
> > --
> > =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 Wulfraed =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 Dennis Lee Bieber =A0 =A0 =A0 =
=A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 KD6MOG
> > =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 wlfr...@ix.netcom.com HTTP://wlfraed.home.netcom.com/
>
> For some reason (that I don't get at all) lots of systems define long
> as -180 <=3D x <=3D +180 degrees.
>
> Having the potential to alias a position seems like a bad idea for a
> start, so when I've been coding such systems up, I've always spent a
> bit of time making it convert positions into the range -180 <=3D x <
> +180 degrees and using a proper ADT.
>
> I wonder if it was anything to do with that?...

I would have thought a longitude was really a mod 360, shifted by -180
for display purposes? For fractional degrees (i.e. minutes and
seconds), make that mod (360 * 60 * 60), shift by -180 * 60 * 60 and
split in degrees, minutes and seconds when displaying.

--
Ludovic Brenta.