D for safety critical applications

[Dominikus Dittes Scherkl]

On Tuesday, 9 February 2021 at 14:14:42 UTC, Bastiaan Veelo wrote:
> On Tuesday, 9 February 2021 at 13:22:22 UTC, Gregor Mückl wrote:

>> I'm not aware that any certification requires explicit proof 
>> that you avoid those bugs.[...]
>
> This makes me wonder what certifying the tool practically 
> brings to the table, apart from doors that can be entered with 
> a certificate only.
Nothing. It's a key to some doors. If you like to enter them, you 
have to have the key. It's the same as with every certificate.
E.g. if you don't have a CE-certificate, you can't sell your 
product in the EU.
If you don't have the ISO-certificate, can't sell your controller 
software to a major vendor.

> If certification of the tool does not improve the safety of the 
> product and does not make it easier to test the safety of the 
> product, I have the feeling that the certificate only improves 
> perceived safety.
No, the certificate ensures that someone put intense thoughts 
about safety into the tool and documented what usecases it is 
good for and what you need to avoid to create a safe product with 
it. Thoughts that you would have to do yourself if you use a tool 
without that certificate.

I know, here are a lot of people that have very little trust in 
thoughts that someone else put into something, but it's their 
choice: use something certified or spent a lot of time to prove 
it yourself.
If you proof it yourself anyway, a certificate maybe really 
useless for you.