On Mon, 16 Nov 2009 12:48:51 -0800, Walter Bright <newshou...@digitalmars.com> wrote:
> >If you've got a system that relies on the software continuing to >function after an unexpected null seg fault, you have a VERY BADLY >DESIGNED and COMPLETELY UNSAFE system. I really cannot emphasize this >enough. I have an example of such a software: http://www.steinberg.net/en/products/audiopostproduction_product/nuendo4.html It loads third-party plugins into the host process's address space, an consequently it may fail at any moment. The software's design is not the best ever but it gives the user last chance to save his work in case of fatal error. This feature has saved my back a couple of times. > >P.S. I worked for Boeing for years on flight critical systems. Normally >I eschew credentialism, but I feel very strongly about this issue and >wish to point out that my knowledge on this is based on decades of real >world experience by aviation companies who take this issue extremely >seriously. Then, instead of sticking with Windows and the likes, you may want to think about porting dmd to a more serious environment specifically designed for developing such systems. What about a real-time microkernel OS like this one: http://www.qnx.com/products/neutrino_rtos/ ?