3 ms·
Sometimes, eg aspects of automotive functional safety, MISRA C might be all you get. These NASA principles are more about enabling better possible static analy
by airbreather 2y ago
Sometimes, eg aspects of automotive functional safety, MISRA C might be all you get.
These NASA principles are more about enabling better possible static analysis of the code and ease of someone else, maybe decades later, debugging or pushing changes to something likely on another planet.
Also you have to remember space based computing lags well behind terrestrial computing because of the radiation hardening. They are often still dealing with legacy systems that might be 8 bit with very limited memory, they were still in the hardware expensive engineers cheap mode until well into the nineties, if not later. Rad750s run at 400 mips and were, and maybe are, preferred choice of processor.
- toolslive 2y agoThese days, there are compilers for embedded systems that can prove for certain code (for example) that it runs in constant time and constant space. As an example, galois.com has been doing this for Haskell, not just for embedded systems, but also for even more low level things like FPGAs.