I agree with Rob. Boost smart pointers might be really valuable on such kind of development, since memory management might be critical. Another Boost libraries that might be interesting on such applications are Statechart and Meta State Machine (MSM), since on critical safety applications you might work with finite state machines that always goes to a safe and known state. In other hand, you might have a hard time convincing them to use boost since PDS (Previously Developed Software) as it may be developed independently of any specific application and not developed in house, are not necessarily compliant with the requirements they should fulfill. Even if you are able to prove that a specific boost library might fulfill all the safety requirements, you will have to stick with an specific version since the library in use might not guarantee the requirements with new updates. However, this does not means that you cannot use the boost concepts ideas and develop in-house subsets of the boost libraries that fulfills all security requirements requirements applied. On Fri Dec 05 2014 at 4:09:47 AM Rob Stewart <robertstewart@comcast.net> wrote:
On December 5, 2014 4:37:53 AM EST, Andrew Marlow <marlow.agents@gmail.com> wrote:
Hello fellow boosters,
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?
I can only suggest that Boost.Units should be of significant value in such a domain, but I have no experience with safety critical development. Come to think of it, correct memory management would seem critical, so Boost smart pointers would also be valuable. Beyond that, I couldn't say.
___ Rob
(Sent from my portable computation engine)
_______________________________________________ Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/ mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost