Re: Ada coding standards, was: Re: Real Time IO routines

[anon@anon.org (anon)]

Why the question, was it for NASA. The rest of the standards at NASA 
states that this standard is for the NASA group or a NASA Team.

Plus, I am looking for the Upper-tier standard for all team for software 
programs

Since you documented GNAT a product of Adacore, it it seams that you 
should talk about others vendors as well.

Plus. most standards that use GNAT also state that they should include 
the following pragmas in the source code to insure compatibility. Or at 
least use one or more to limit those features of GNAT that are not 
allowed in the source code.

pragma Restrictions ( No_Implementation_Attributes ) ;
pragma Restrictions ( No_Implementation_Pragmas ) ;
pragma Restrictions ( No_Implementation_Restrictions ) ;


In <ufxzq5hpi.fsf@stephe-leake.org>, Stephen Leake <stephen_leake@stephe-leake.org> writes:
>anon@anon.org (anon) writes:
>
>> 1. The standard is wriiten for another company which may or may not
>> be apart of NASA. 
>
>Interesting. What gives you that impression? Apparently it is written
>in a confusing way, because you are confused.
>
>> So is this the true NASA standards?
>
>http://fsw.gsfc.nasa.gov/gds/code_standards_ada.pdf is _not_ a
>NASA-wide standard, it is just the standard used by my small group.
>
>This is clearly stated in the first paragraph:
>
>    This document presents the coding standards used by the Goddard
>    Dynamic Simulator project for the Ada language.
>
>The title also states that this is specific to a specific project:
>
>    Goddard Dynamic Simulator Ada Coding Standard
>
>> 2. We all know that the ISO adopted the Ada 2005 aka Ada 2007 standards 
>> back in Jan 2007.  The NASA coding standard is dated in July, 2007 and 
>> stated that the ISO has not adopted the Ada 2005 standards.  So, either 
>> this is an error or the paper is just a redated older standard. 
>
>Ah, thanks; I'll fix that.
>
>Yes, I recently added information on using Ada 2005 structures, and
>advice on when to use access types. But I forgot to update the status
>of the standard.
>
>> 3. In 2004 SGI installed a 512 CPU super computer for NASA that uses 
>> LINUX and Ada (Ada 95, SGI version).  The paper would have touch on 
>> that issue as well.  
>
>No, my group does not use that computer.
>
>> So, any standard would acknowledge this and state issues with each
>> vendor and their implementation of Ada and other languages. 
>
>Interesting. Why would a document called "Goddard Dynamic Simulator
>Ada Coding Standard" address other projects and other languages?
>
>-- 
>-- Stephe