Bob, You've got a neat website there. I'll have to spend some time looking at it.
Peter hit the nail on the head. Quite often latest version != most reliable version. I don't have a specific standard in mind, but I'm working on an ECU application where reliability is important to me. Thanks for the help so far, -DC > On Wed, Dec 17, 2008 at 6:37 PM, David Carr <d...@dcarr.org> wrote: > >> By reliability, I mean least probability of undetected errors in machine >> code generation. IE: The machine code conforms to the source code. > > > "How to verify your compiler for use in IEC 61508 safety-critical > applications; A step-by-step guide to what's necessary to satisfy the > IEC61508 safety-critical requirements for compiler verification." > > http://www.embedded.com/design/opensource/202800510 > > You have to disassemble the HEX file to be sure what you are putting in > the > device, > is really what you wanted. I have personally been bitten by an assembler > that made > a good listing and bad HEX file. That was fun to debug. As was the CPU > (Non-AVR) > that had a bad XOR instruction, but only on certain bit patterns. This > why > the > new "White Goods" standards is harder to pass self-test, than some the > things that > really could kill you. Gets even more fun when the standard says the > device > must > be in operational mode in under one second... > > Is there some standard you are aiming for like FDA or DO178D? > > See if there is anything that might answer your question at my site: > http://www.softwaresafety.net/ > > -- > http://www.wearablesmartsensors.com/ > http://www.softwaresafety.net/ > http://www.designer-iii.com/ > http://www.unusualresearch.com/ > _______________________________________________ > AVR-GCC-list mailing list > AVR-GCC-list@nongnu.org > http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/avr-gcc-list > _______________________________________________ AVR-GCC-list mailing list AVR-GCC-list@nongnu.org http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/avr-gcc-list
