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=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 Path: border1.nntp.dca3.giganews.com!backlog3.nntp.dca3.giganews.com!border3.nntp.dca.giganews.com!border1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!goblin1!goblin.stu.neva.ru!eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Simon Wright Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: Documentation tools and standards? Date: Sat, 14 Dec 2013 09:05:48 +0000 Organization: A noiseless patient Spider Message-ID: References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Injection-Info: mx05.eternal-september.org; posting-host="aa5206ded37b2ca7f9833bd0a598d69e"; logging-data="742"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1+5ZFqUUbBlvKOcyxndY+tclRX8/UnrZo8=" User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.3 (darwin) Cancel-Lock: sha1:DEQqXQ0eLNbRdU+aIHXc1Gqv8mg= sha1:vhvFV4A4bH5126wvxt669mDa4DA= X-Original-Bytes: 1635 Xref: number.nntp.dca.giganews.com comp.lang.ada:184263 Date: 2013-12-14T09:05:48+00:00 List-Id: Diogenes writes: > As far as the Requirements and Arch docs, are there any published > standards and tools that the Ada community generally prefers when > working with Ada code? Any links to those standards? Some UK MoD contractors still work to MIL STD 498[1], or at least the DIDs (which specify the required contents of each document type). The problem with IEEE 12207 is that it's a lot less prescriptive than 498, and, the last time I checked, it wasn't freely available (but see [2]; not sure of the legality of this). [1] http://pushface.org/mil_498.html [2] http://www.math.unipd.it/~tullio/IS-1/2009/Approfondimenti/ISO_12207-2008.pdf