Maybe the people who made the decision on which language don't have an overall view of the strength and weakness of Ada and C++ languages. Or they don't have an enough long-term expectation on final system before making the decision. Luke Zhang --- Terry Westley <[log in to unmask]> wrote: > I just heard that some organization (perhaps > Lockheed or JSF SPO) > has chosen MISRA C over Ada for JSF flight software. > > According to http://www.misra.org.uk/> MISRA C is a > standard > for a "restricted subset of a high-level language > for programming > safety-related systems. The C programming language > is being increasingly > used for automotive applications, due largely to the > inherent language > flexibility, the extent of support and its potential > for portability > across a wide range of hardware. However the nature > of the C language > is such that there are many areas of concern which > potentially > jeopardise > the high level of integrity required from the final > executable code." > > Why in the world would you choose an inherently > unsafe language for > any safety-critical application? I can't look at > the standard because > you have to buy a copy. I hope they recommend > against the use of > pointers and C arrays, otherwise you can't make C > safe. > > Surely Spark Ada would have been a better choice. > > -- > Terry Westley > [log in to unmask] __________________________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now. http://mailplus.yahoo.com