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: 103376,267eec8ad557a7d0 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public From: dewar@cs.nyu.edu (Robert Dewar) Subject: Re: ARIANE-5 Failure (DC-X works) Date: 1996/06/14 Message-ID: #1/1 X-Deja-AN: 160362011 references: <834097751.22632.0@assen.demon.co.uk> <4pd540$rl2@Starbase.NeoSoft.COM> <4pd7qc$kp2@dfw-ixnews4.ix.netcom.com> <4pg9gj$ohs@Starbase.NeoSoft.COM> <31C0526C.2D99@lmtas.lmco.com> organization: Courant Institute of Mathematical Sciences newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Date: 1996-06-14T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: Ken asks "I don't know if I need a waiver or not. When I've asked this question in the past, I've always been told that a waiver is not required. Could you cite where you think the policy excludes the output from consideration? This is pretty important, since some F-22 Ada code is auto-generated, and by your definition I would need a waiver for all these cases!" To me, the issue is quite clear. If the Ada code is delivered and will be maintained at the Ada level, then the method used in generating it is irrelevant, and certainly the Ada policy is complied with. If what is delivered is the 4GL code, and Ada acts merely as an intermediate language which will never be looked at by a person, let alone maintained, then the program really is written in another language, and a waiver really is required (though, if a very hgh level language is being used appropriately), such a waiver is certainly reasonable (and in fact I may be wrong, but I think there is some kind of blanket permission to use high level tools of the 4GL type).