Subject: Re: [boost] Use of boost in safety critical work
From: Andrew Marlow (marlow.agents_at_[hidden])
Date: 2014-12-09 07:06:27
On 9 December 2014 at 11:57, dgutson . <danielgutson_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 5, 2014 at 6:37 AM, Andrew Marlow <marlow.agents_at_[hidden]>
> > 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
> > 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.
Indeed. Many thanks to all those who have contributed so far.
> Question to Andrew: what about the STL then, do they classify as SOUP
> too? Or they have a verified implementation?
The STL is suspect and they do classify it as SOUP. They do not have a
verified implementation, they use the one that comes with Visual Studio
2008. Since it is viewed with suspicion only certain parts of it are used.
> 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.
Will do. Thanks for the heads up.
> Maybe, we could broaden the
> group's scope to include safety critical systems too (just thinking).
-- Regards, Andrew Marlow http://www.andrewpetermarlow.co.uk
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk