Subject: Re: [boost] Use of boost in safety critical work
From: dgutson . (danielgutson_at_[hidden])
Date: 2014-12-09 06:57:48
On Fri, Dec 5, 2014 at 6:37 AM, Andrew Marlow <marlow.agents_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> Hello fellow boosters,
> I am currently considering a job which involves embedded safety critical.
> It is for a neonatal ventilator so the safety critical aspect really is
> critical rather than just 'jolly important'. The company says the
> development will be in C++ but they have not even heard of boost, let alone
> use it. They introduced me to a new acronym, well new to me anyway: SOUP.
> It stands for Software of Unknown Pedigree. They classify boost as SOUP.
Hi Andrew, and everybody.
This is a so fruitful thread, full of information.
Question to Andrew: what about the STL then, do they classify as SOUP
too? Or they have a verified implementation?
Regarding the others, sorry the spam, but I don't want to loose this
opportunity: I'm pursuing the creation of a "C++ for embedded and
real-time systems" Study Group within the Standard, so I'd like to
invite interested people to join to the mailing list in order to
participate in the discussions and in the proposals. For those
interested, just email me privately. Maybe, we could broaden the
group's scope to include safety critical systems too (just thinking).
> I have used boost before in embedded work but I have never done safety
> critical work before so I don't know how widely boost is used there. Can
> anyone who *has* worked on safety critical stuff comment please?
> Andrew Marlow
> Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
-- Whoâs got the sweetest disposition? One guess, thatâs who? Whoâd never, ever start an argument? Who never shows a bit of temperament? Who's never wrong but always right? Who'd never dream of starting a fight? Who get stuck with all the bad luck?