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-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,f039470e8f537101 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2003-07-29 12:35:56 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!logbridge.uoregon.edu!arclight.uoregon.edu!enews.sgi.com!news.xtra.co.nz!53ab2750!not-for-mail Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: Ariane5 FAQ From: Berend de Boer Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.090014 (Oort Gnus v0.14) Emacs/21.2 (i386-msvc-nt5.0.2195) References: <1058968422.225561@master.nyc.kbcfp.com> <3F200AD0.94F79098@adaworks.com> <7u9Ua.13412$634.10307@nwrdny03.gnilink.net> <3F215120.1040706@attbi.com> <1059151910.357790@master.nyc.kbcfp.com> <3F248CEE.5050709@attbi.com> Cancel-Lock: sha1:5roCYbJJ47lhNhdSCpzXZ1ijRrI= MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Date: Wed, 30 Jul 2003 07:34:09 +1200 NNTP-Posting-Host: 219.88.64.124 X-Complaints-To: newsadmin@xtra.co.nz X-Trace: news.xtra.co.nz 1059507355 219.88.64.124 (Wed, 30 Jul 2003 07:35:55 NZST) NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 30 Jul 2003 07:35:55 NZST Organization: Xtra Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:40959 Date: 2003-07-30T07:34:09+12:00 List-Id: >>>>> "Robert" == Robert I Eachus writes: Robert> Berend de Boer wrote: >> Except requirements it seems. And I think you should have a >> look at Design By Contract and in particular Eiffel. Robert> No. And that is what all the sound and fury has been Robert> about. The mapping from requirements to actual code was Robert> perfectly done. The problem was that the requirements Robert> which were perfectly filled were for the Ariane 4, not the Robert> Ariane 5. Robert> The nature of the political/management problem at Robert> Arianespace was such that no one ever saw both the Ariane Robert> 5 requirements and the SRI documentation until after the Robert> disaster. The point is that the requirements should be *in the code*. That's where they belong. Not sure if this would have made a difference, but if you want to reuse code, you should now the conditions under which it should work. If programmers just grab code and reuse it without looking at those preconditions, well, you're not doing your job right. And for those preconditions: use comments, DbC, whatever. And Ada has even Spark (that's something we need in the Eiffel world!). -- Regards, Berend. (-: