| Abstract: | The U.S. Department of Defense has recently issued a set of requirements, which it called IRONMAN, for the design of a programming language that it will use for embedded computer applications. To date four competing languages have been designed and, after considerable debate and scrutiny, these have been reduced to two. It is expected that the winning language will be selected during 1979. This report compares the IRONMAN requirements against the state-of-the-art in systems implementation language design in an attempt to see the extent to which IRONMAN can be met from existing technology. Particular emphasis is given to the areas of large-scale program structuring, parallel programming, exception handling and hardware interaction. Finally, Dijkstra's criticism of IRONMAN and the competing languages will be examined. It will be argued that he may be justified in doubting the viability of a language with such diverse features. |
