%!
%%BoundingBox: (atend)
%%Pages: (atend)
%%DocumentFonts: (atend)
%%EndComments
%
% FrameMaker PostScript Prolog 3.0, for use with FrameMaker 3.0
% Copyright (c) 1986,87,89,90,91 by Frame Technology Corporation.
% All rights reserved.
%
% Known Problems:
%	Due to bugs in Transcript, the 'PS-Adobe-' is omitted from line 1
/FMversion (3.0) def 
% Set up Color vs. Black-and-White
	/FMPrintInColor systemdict /colorimage known
		systemdict /currentcolortransfer known or def
% Uncomment this line to force b&w on color printer
%   /FMPrintInColor false def
/FrameDict 195 dict def 
systemdict /errordict known not {/errordict 10 dict def
		errordict /rangecheck {stop} put} if
% The readline in 23.0 doesn't recognize cr's as nl's on AppleTalk
FrameDict /tmprangecheck errordict /rangecheck get put 
errordict /rangecheck {FrameDict /bug true put} put 
FrameDict /bug false put 
mark 
% Some PS machines read past the CR, so keep the following 3 lines together!
currentfile 5 string readline
00
0000000000
cleartomark 
errordict /rangecheck FrameDict /tmprangecheck get put 
FrameDict /bug get { 
	/readline {
		/gstring exch def
		/gfile exch def
		/gindex 0 def
		{
			gfile read pop 
			dup 10 eq {exit} if 
			dup 13 eq {exit} if 
			gstring exch gindex exch put 
			/gindex gindex 1 add def 
		} loop
		pop 
		gstring 0 gindex getinterval true 
		} def
	} if
/FMVERSION {
	FMversion ne {
		/Times-Roman findfont 18 scalefont setfont
		100 100 moveto
		(FrameMaker version does not match postscript_prolog!)
		dup =
		show showpage
		} if
	} def 
/FMLOCAL {
	FrameDict begin
	0 def 
	end 
	} def 
	/gstring FMLOCAL
	/gfile FMLOCAL
	/gindex FMLOCAL
	/orgxfer FMLOCAL
	/orgproc FMLOCAL
	/organgle FMLOCAL
	/orgfreq FMLOCAL
	/yscale FMLOCAL
	/xscale FMLOCAL
	/manualfeed FMLOCAL
	/paperheight FMLOCAL
	/paperwidth FMLOCAL
/FMDOCUMENT { 
	array /FMfonts exch def 
	/#copies exch def
	FrameDict begin
	0 ne dup {setmanualfeed} if
	/manualfeed exch def
	/paperheight exch def
	/paperwidth exch def
	/yscale exch def
	/xscale exch def
	currenttransfer cvlit /orgxfer exch def
	currentscreen cvlit /orgproc exch def
	/organgle exch def /orgfreq exch def
	setpapername 
	manualfeed {true} {papersize} ifelse 
	{manualpapersize} {false} ifelse 
	{desperatepapersize} if
	end 
	} def 
	/pagesave FMLOCAL
	/orgmatrix FMLOCAL
	/landscape FMLOCAL
/FMBEGINPAGE { 
	FrameDict begin 
	/pagesave save def
	3.86 setmiterlimit
	/landscape exch 0 ne def
	landscape { 
		90 rotate 0 exch neg translate pop 
		}
		{pop pop}
		ifelse
	xscale yscale scale
	/orgmatrix matrix def
	gsave 
	} def 
/FMENDPAGE {
	grestore 
	pagesave restore
	end 
	showpage
	} def 
/FMFONTDEFINE { 
	FrameDict begin
	findfont 
	ReEncode 
	1 index exch 
	definefont 
	FMfonts 3 1 roll 
	put
	end 
	} def 
/FMFILLS {
	FrameDict begin
	array /fillvals exch def
	end 
	} def 
/FMFILL {
	FrameDict begin
	 fillvals 3 1 roll put
	end 
	} def 
/FMNORMALIZEGRAPHICS { 
	newpath
	0.0 0.0 moveto
	1 setlinewidth
	0 setlinecap
	0 0 0 sethsbcolor
	0 setgray 
	} bind def
	/fx FMLOCAL
	/fy FMLOCAL
	/fh FMLOCAL
	/fw FMLOCAL
	/llx FMLOCAL
	/lly FMLOCAL
	/urx FMLOCAL
	/ury FMLOCAL
/FMBEGINEPSF { 
	end 
	/FMEPSF save def 
	/showpage {} def 
	FMNORMALIZEGRAPHICS 
	[/fy /fx /fh /fw /ury /urx /lly /llx] {exch def} forall 
	fx fy translate 
	rotate
	fw urx llx sub div fh ury lly sub div scale 
	llx neg lly neg translate 
	} bind def
/FMENDEPSF {
	FMEPSF restore
	FrameDict begin 
	} bind def
FrameDict begin 
/setmanualfeed {
%%BeginFeature *ManualFeed True
	 statusdict /manualfeed true put
%%EndFeature
	} def
/max {2 copy lt {exch} if pop} bind def
/min {2 copy gt {exch} if pop} bind def
/inch {72 mul} def
/pagedimen { 
	paperheight sub abs 16 lt exch 
	paperwidth sub abs 16 lt and
	{/papername exch def} {pop} ifelse
	} def
	/papersizedict FMLOCAL
/setpapername { 
	/papersizedict 14 dict def 
	papersizedict begin
	/papername /unknown def 
		/Letter 8.5 inch 11.0 inch pagedimen
		/LetterSmall 7.68 inch 10.16 inch pagedimen
		/Tabloid 11.0 inch 17.0 inch pagedimen
		/Ledger 17.0 inch 11.0 inch pagedimen
		/Legal 8.5 inch 14.0 inch pagedimen
		/Statement 5.5 inch 8.5 inch pagedimen
		/Executive 7.5 inch 10.0 inch pagedimen
		/A3 11.69 inch 16.5 inch pagedimen
		/A4 8.26 inch 11.69 inch pagedimen
		/A4Small 7.47 inch 10.85 inch pagedimen
		/B4 10.125 inch 14.33 inch pagedimen
		/B5 7.16 inch 10.125 inch pagedimen
	end
	} def
/papersize {
	papersizedict begin
		/Letter {lettertray letter} def
		/LetterSmall {lettertray lettersmall} def
		/Tabloid {11x17tray 11x17} def
		/Ledger {ledgertray ledger} def
		/Legal {legaltray legal} def
		/Statement {statementtray statement} def
		/Executive {executivetray executive} def
		/A3 {a3tray a3} def
		/A4 {a4tray a4} def
		/A4Small {a4tray a4small} def
		/B4 {b4tray b4} def
		/B5 {b5tray b5} def
		/unknown {unknown} def
	papersizedict dup papername known {papername} {/unknown} ifelse get
	end
	/FMdicttop countdictstack 1 add def 
	statusdict begin stopped end 
	countdictstack -1 FMdicttop {pop end} for 
	} def
/manualpapersize {
	papersizedict begin
		/Letter {letter} def
		/LetterSmall {lettersmall} def
		/Tabloid {11x17} def
		/Ledger {ledger} def
		/Legal {legal} def
		/Statement {statement} def
		/Executive {executive} def
		/A3 {a3} def
		/A4 {a4} def
		/A4Small {a4small} def
		/B4 {b4} def
		/B5 {b5} def
		/unknown {unknown} def
	papersizedict dup papername known {papername} {/unknown} ifelse get
	end
	stopped 
	} def
/desperatepapersize {
	statusdict /setpageparams known
		{
		paperwidth paperheight 0 1 
		statusdict begin
		{setpageparams} stopped pop 
		end
		} if
	} def
/savematrix {
	orgmatrix currentmatrix pop
	} bind def
/restorematrix {
	orgmatrix setmatrix
	} bind def
/dmatrix matrix def
/dpi    72 0 dmatrix defaultmatrix dtransform
    dup mul exch   dup mul add   sqrt def
/freq dpi 18.75 div 8 div round dup 0 eq {pop 1} if 8 mul dpi exch div def
/sangle 1 0 dmatrix defaultmatrix dtransform exch atan def
/DiacriticEncoding [
/.notdef /.notdef /.notdef /.notdef /.notdef /.notdef /.notdef
/.notdef /.notdef /.notdef /.notdef /.notdef /.notdef /.notdef
/.notdef /.notdef /.notdef /.notdef /.notdef /.notdef /.notdef
/.notdef /.notdef /.notdef /.notdef /.notdef /.notdef /.notdef
/.notdef /.notdef /.notdef /.notdef /space /exclam /quotedbl
/numbersign /dollar /percent /ampersand /quotesingle /parenleft
/parenright /asterisk /plus /comma /hyphen /period /slash /zero /one
/two /three /four /five /six /seven /eight /nine /colon /semicolon
/less /equal /greater /question /at /A /B /C /D /E /F /G /H /I /J /K
/L /M /N /O /P /Q /R /S /T /U /V /W /X /Y /Z /bracketleft /backslash
/bracketright /asciicircum /underscore /grave /a /b /c /d /e /f /g /h
/i /j /k /l /m /n /o /p /q /r /s /t /u /v /w /x /y /z /braceleft /bar
/braceright /asciitilde /.notdef /Adieresis /Aring /Ccedilla /Eacute
/Ntilde /Odieresis /Udieresis /aacute /agrave /acircumflex /adieresis
/atilde /aring /ccedilla /eacute /egrave /ecircumflex /edieresis
/iacute /igrave /icircumflex /idieresis /ntilde /oacute /ograve
/ocircumflex /odieresis /otilde /uacute /ugrave /ucircumflex
/udieresis /dagger /.notdef /cent /sterling /section /bullet
/paragraph /germandbls /registered /copyright /trademark /acute
/dieresis /.notdef /AE /Oslash /.notdef /.notdef /.notdef /.notdef
/yen /.notdef /.notdef /.notdef /.notdef /.notdef /.notdef
/ordfeminine /ordmasculine /.notdef /ae /oslash /questiondown
/exclamdown /logicalnot /.notdef /florin /.notdef /.notdef
/guillemotleft /guillemotright /ellipsis /.notdef /Agrave /Atilde
/Otilde /OE /oe /endash /emdash /quotedblleft /quotedblright
/quoteleft /quoteright /.notdef /.notdef /ydieresis /Ydieresis
/fraction /currency /guilsinglleft /guilsinglright /fi /fl /daggerdbl
/periodcentered /quotesinglbase /quotedblbase /perthousand
/Acircumflex /Ecircumflex /Aacute /Edieresis /Egrave /Iacute
/Icircumflex /Idieresis /Igrave /Oacute /Ocircumflex /.notdef /Ograve
/Uacute /Ucircumflex /Ugrave /dotlessi /circumflex /tilde /macron
/breve /dotaccent /ring /cedilla /hungarumlaut /ogonek /caron
] def
/ReEncode { 
	dup 
	length 
	dict begin 
	{
	1 index /FID ne 
		{def} 
		{pop pop} ifelse 
	} forall 
	0 eq {/Encoding DiacriticEncoding def} if 
	currentdict 
	end 
	} bind def
/graymode true def
	/bwidth FMLOCAL
	/bpside FMLOCAL
	/bstring FMLOCAL
	/onbits FMLOCAL
	/offbits FMLOCAL
	/xindex FMLOCAL
	/yindex FMLOCAL
	/x FMLOCAL
	/y FMLOCAL
/setpattern {
	 /bwidth  exch def
	 /bpside  exch def
	 /bstring exch def
	 /onbits 0 def  /offbits 0 def
	 freq sangle landscape {90 add} if 
		{/y exch def
		 /x exch def
		 /xindex x 1 add 2 div bpside mul cvi def
		 /yindex y 1 add 2 div bpside mul cvi def
		 bstring yindex bwidth mul xindex 8 idiv add get
		 1 7 xindex 8 mod sub bitshift and 0 ne
		 {/onbits  onbits  1 add def 1}
		 {/offbits offbits 1 add def 0}
		 ifelse
		}
		setscreen
	 {} settransfer
	 offbits offbits onbits add div FMsetgray
	/graymode false def
	} bind def
/grayness {
	FMsetgray
	graymode not {
		/graymode true def
		orgxfer cvx settransfer
		orgfreq organgle orgproc cvx setscreen
		} if
	} bind def
	/HUE FMLOCAL
	/SAT FMLOCAL
	/BRIGHT FMLOCAL
	/Colors FMLOCAL
FMPrintInColor 
	
	{
	/HUE 0 def
	/SAT 0 def
	/BRIGHT 0 def
	% array of arrays Hue and Sat values for the separations [HUE BRIGHT]
	/Colors   
	[[0    0  ]    % black
	 [0    0  ]    % white
	 [0.00 1.0]    % red
	 [0.37 1.0]    % green
	 [0.60 1.0]    % blue
	 [0.50 1.0]    % cyan
	 [0.83 1.0]    % magenta
	 [0.16 1.0]    % comment / yellow
	 ] def
      
	/BEGINBITMAPCOLOR { 
		BITMAPCOLOR} def
	/BEGINBITMAPCOLORc { 
		BITMAPCOLORc} def
	/BEGINBITMAPTRUECOLOR { 
		BITMAPTRUECOLOR } def
	/BEGINBITMAPTRUECOLORc { 
		BITMAPTRUECOLORc } def
	/K { 
		Colors exch get dup
		0 get /HUE exch store 
		1 get /BRIGHT exch store
		  HUE 0 eq BRIGHT 0 eq and
			{1.0 SAT sub setgray}
			{HUE SAT BRIGHT sethsbcolor} 
		  ifelse
		} def
	/FMsetgray { 
		/SAT exch 1.0 exch sub store 
		  HUE 0 eq BRIGHT 0 eq and
			{1.0 SAT sub setgray}
			{HUE SAT BRIGHT sethsbcolor} 
		  ifelse
		} bind def
	}
	
	{
	/BEGINBITMAPCOLOR { 
		BITMAPGRAY} def
	/BEGINBITMAPCOLORc { 
		BITMAPGRAYc} def
	/BEGINBITMAPTRUECOLOR { 
		BITMAPTRUEGRAY } def
	/BEGINBITMAPTRUECOLORc { 
		BITMAPTRUEGRAYc } def
	/FMsetgray {setgray} bind def
	/K { 
		pop
		} def
	}
ifelse
/normalize {
	transform round exch round exch itransform
	} bind def
/dnormalize {
	dtransform round exch round exch idtransform
	} bind def
/lnormalize { 
	0 dtransform exch cvi 2 idiv 2 mul 1 add exch idtransform pop
	} bind def
/H { 
	lnormalize setlinewidth
	} bind def
/Z {
	setlinecap
	} bind def
	/fillvals FMLOCAL
/X { 
	fillvals exch get
	dup type /stringtype eq
	{8 1 setpattern} 
	{grayness}
	ifelse
	} bind def
/V { 
	gsave eofill grestore
	} bind def
/N { 
	stroke
	} bind def
/M {newpath moveto} bind def
/E {lineto} bind def
/D {curveto} bind def
/O {closepath} bind def
	/n FMLOCAL
/L { 
 	/n exch def
	newpath
	normalize
	moveto 
	2 1 n {pop normalize lineto} for
	} bind def
/Y { 
	L 
	closepath
	} bind def
	/x1 FMLOCAL
	/x2 FMLOCAL
	/y1 FMLOCAL
	/y2 FMLOCAL
	/rad FMLOCAL
/R { 
	/y2 exch def
	/x2 exch def
	/y1 exch def
	/x1 exch def
	x1 y1
	x2 y1
	x2 y2
	x1 y2
	4 Y 
	} bind def
/RR { 
	/rad exch def
	normalize
	/y2 exch def
	/x2 exch def
	normalize
	/y1 exch def
	/x1 exch def
	newpath
	x1 y1 rad add moveto
	x1 y2 x2 y2 rad arcto
	x2 y2 x2 y1 rad arcto
	x2 y1 x1 y1 rad arcto
	x1 y1 x1 y2 rad arcto
	closepath
	16 {pop} repeat
	} bind def
/C { 
	grestore
	gsave
	R 
	clip
	} bind def
	/FMpointsize FMLOCAL
/F { 
	FMfonts exch get
	FMpointsize scalefont
	setfont
	} bind def
/Q { 
	/FMpointsize exch def
	F 
	} bind def
/T { 
	moveto show
	} bind def
/RF { 
	rotate
	0 ne {-1 1 scale} if
	} bind def
/TF { 
	gsave
	moveto 
	RF
	show
	grestore
	} bind def
/P { 
	moveto
	0 32 3 2 roll widthshow
	} bind def
/PF { 
	gsave
	moveto 
	RF
	0 32 3 2 roll widthshow
	grestore
	} bind def
/S { 
	moveto
	0 exch ashow
	} bind def
/SF { 
	gsave
	moveto
	RF
	0 exch ashow
	grestore
	} bind def
/B { 
	moveto
	0 32 4 2 roll 0 exch awidthshow
	} bind def
/BF { 
	gsave
	moveto
	RF
	0 32 4 2 roll 0 exch awidthshow
	grestore
	} bind def
/G { 
	gsave
	newpath
	normalize translate 0.0 0.0 moveto 
	dnormalize scale 
	0.0 0.0 1.0 5 3 roll arc 
	closepath fill
	grestore
	} bind def
/A { 
	gsave
	savematrix
	newpath
	2 index 2 div add exch 3 index 2 div sub exch 
	normalize 2 index 2 div sub exch 3 index 2 div add exch 
	translate 
	scale 
	0.0 0.0 1.0 5 3 roll arc 
	restorematrix
	stroke
	grestore
	} bind def
	/x FMLOCAL
	/y FMLOCAL
	/w FMLOCAL
	/h FMLOCAL
	/xx FMLOCAL
	/yy FMLOCAL
	/ww FMLOCAL
	/hh FMLOCAL
	/FMsaveobject FMLOCAL
	/FMoptop FMLOCAL
	/FMdicttop FMLOCAL
/BEGINPRINTCODE { 
	/FMdicttop countdictstack 1 add def 
	/FMoptop count 4 sub def 
	/FMsaveobject save def
	userdict begin 
	/showpage {} def 
	FMNORMALIZEGRAPHICS 
	3 index neg 3 index neg translate
	} bind def
/ENDPRINTCODE {
	count -1 FMoptop {pop pop} for 
	countdictstack -1 FMdicttop {pop end} for 
	FMsaveobject restore 
	} bind def
/gn { 
	0 
	{	46 mul 
		cf read pop 
		32 sub 
		dup 46 lt {exit} if 
		46 sub add 
		} loop
	add 
	} bind def
	/str FMLOCAL
/cfs { 
	/str sl string def 
	0 1 sl 1 sub {str exch val put} for 
	str def 
	} bind def
/ic [ 
	0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0223
	0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0223
	0
	{0 hx} {1 hx} {2 hx} {3 hx} {4 hx} {5 hx} {6 hx} {7 hx} {8 hx} {9 hx}
	{10 hx} {11 hx} {12 hx} {13 hx} {14 hx} {15 hx} {16 hx} {17 hx} {18 hx}
	{19 hx} {gn hx} {0} {1} {2} {3} {4} {5} {6} {7} {8} {9} {10} {11} {12}
	{13} {14} {15} {16} {17} {18} {19} {gn} {0 wh} {1 wh} {2 wh} {3 wh}
	{4 wh} {5 wh} {6 wh} {7 wh} {8 wh} {9 wh} {10 wh} {11 wh} {12 wh}
	{13 wh} {14 wh} {gn wh} {0 bl} {1 bl} {2 bl} {3 bl} {4 bl} {5 bl} {6 bl}
	{7 bl} {8 bl} {9 bl} {10 bl} {11 bl} {12 bl} {13 bl} {14 bl} {gn bl}
	{0 fl} {1 fl} {2 fl} {3 fl} {4 fl} {5 fl} {6 fl} {7 fl} {8 fl} {9 fl}
	{10 fl} {11 fl} {12 fl} {13 fl} {14 fl} {gn fl}
	] def
	/sl FMLOCAL
	/val FMLOCAL
	/ws FMLOCAL
	/im FMLOCAL
	/bs FMLOCAL
	/cs FMLOCAL
	/len FMLOCAL
	/pos FMLOCAL
/ms { 
	/sl exch def 
	/val 255 def 
	/ws cfs 
	/im cfs 
	/val 0 def 
	/bs cfs 
	/cs cfs 
	} bind def
400 ms 
/ip { 
	is 
	0 
	cf cs readline pop 
	{	ic exch get exec 
		add 
		} forall 
	pop 
	
	} bind def
/wh { 
	/len exch def 
	/pos exch def 
	ws 0 len getinterval im pos len getinterval copy pop
	pos len 
	} bind def
/bl { 
	/len exch def 
	/pos exch def 
	bs 0 len getinterval im pos len getinterval copy pop
	pos len 
	} bind def
/s1 1 string def
/fl { 
	/len exch def 
	/pos exch def 
	/val cf s1 readhexstring pop 0 get def
	pos 1 pos len add 1 sub {im exch val put} for
	pos len 
	} bind def
/hx { 
	3 copy getinterval 
	cf exch readhexstring pop pop 
	} bind def
	/h FMLOCAL
	/w FMLOCAL
	/d FMLOCAL
	/lb FMLOCAL
	/bitmapsave FMLOCAL
	/is FMLOCAL
	/cf FMLOCAL
/wbytes { 
	dup 
	8 eq {pop} {1 eq {7 add 8 idiv} {3 add 4 idiv} ifelse} ifelse
	} bind def
/BEGINBITMAPBWc { 
	1 {} COMMONBITMAPc
	} bind def
/BEGINBITMAPGRAYc { 
	8 {} COMMONBITMAPc
	} bind def
/BEGINBITMAP2BITc { 
	2 {} COMMONBITMAPc
	} bind def
/COMMONBITMAPc { 
	/r exch def
	/d exch def
	gsave
	translate rotate scale /h exch def /w exch def
	/lb w d wbytes def 
	sl lb lt {lb ms} if 
	/bitmapsave save def 
	r                    
	/is im 0 lb getinterval def 
	ws 0 lb getinterval is copy pop 
	/cf currentfile def 
	w h d [w 0 0 h neg 0 h] 
	{ip} image 
	bitmapsave restore 
	grestore
	} bind def
/BEGINBITMAPBW { 
	1 {} COMMONBITMAP
	} bind def
/BEGINBITMAPGRAY { 
	8 {} COMMONBITMAP
	} bind def
/BEGINBITMAP2BIT { 
	2 {} COMMONBITMAP
	} bind def
/COMMONBITMAP { 
	/r exch def
	/d exch def
	gsave
	translate rotate scale /h exch def /w exch def
	/bitmapsave save def 
	r                    
	/is w d wbytes string def
	/cf currentfile def 
	w h d [w 0 0 h neg 0 h] 
	{cf is readhexstring pop} image
	bitmapsave restore 
	grestore
	} bind def
	/proc1 FMLOCAL
	/proc2 FMLOCAL
	/newproc FMLOCAL
/Fmcc {
    /proc2 exch cvlit def
    /proc1 exch cvlit def
    /newproc proc1 length proc2 length add array def
    newproc 0 proc1 putinterval
    newproc proc1 length proc2 putinterval
    newproc cvx
} bind def
/ngrayt 256 array def
/nredt 256 array def
/nbluet 256 array def
/ngreent 256 array def
	/gryt FMLOCAL
	/blut FMLOCAL
	/grnt FMLOCAL
	/redt FMLOCAL
	/indx FMLOCAL
	/cynu FMLOCAL
	/magu FMLOCAL
	/yelu FMLOCAL
	/k FMLOCAL
	/u FMLOCAL
/colorsetup {
	currentcolortransfer
	/gryt exch def
	/blut exch def
	/grnt exch def
	/redt exch def
	0 1 255 {
		/indx exch def
		/cynu 1 red indx get 255 div sub def
		/magu 1 green indx get 255 div sub def
		/yelu 1 blue indx get 255 div sub def
		/k cynu magu min yelu min def
		/u k currentundercolorremoval exec def
		nredt indx 1 0 cynu u sub max sub redt exec put
		ngreent indx 1 0 magu u sub max sub grnt exec put
		nbluet indx 1 0 yelu u sub max sub blut exec put
		ngrayt indx 1 k currentblackgeneration exec sub gryt exec put
	} for
	{255 mul cvi nredt exch get}
	{255 mul cvi ngreent exch get}
	{255 mul cvi nbluet exch get}
	{255 mul cvi ngrayt exch get}
	setcolortransfer
	{pop 0} setundercolorremoval
	{} setblackgeneration
	} bind def
	/tran FMLOCAL
/fakecolorsetup {
	/tran 256 string def
	0 1 255 {/indx exch def 
		tran indx
		red indx get 77 mul
		green indx get 151 mul
		blue indx get 28 mul
		add add 256 idiv put} for
	currenttransfer
	{255 mul cvi tran exch get 255.0 div}
	exch Fmcc settransfer
} bind def
/BITMAPCOLOR { 
	/d 8 def
	gsave
	translate rotate scale /h exch def /w exch def
	/bitmapsave save def 
	colorsetup
	/is w d wbytes string def
	/cf currentfile def 
	w h d [w 0 0 h neg 0 h] 
	{cf is readhexstring pop} {is} {is} true 3 colorimage 
	bitmapsave restore 
	grestore
	} bind def
/BITMAPCOLORc { 
	/d 8 def
	gsave
	translate rotate scale /h exch def /w exch def
	/lb w d wbytes def 
	sl lb lt {lb ms} if 
	/bitmapsave save def 
	colorsetup
	/is im 0 lb getinterval def 
	ws 0 lb getinterval is copy pop 
	/cf currentfile def 
	w h d [w 0 0 h neg 0 h] 
	{ip} {is} {is} true 3 colorimage
	bitmapsave restore 
	grestore
	} bind def
/BITMAPTRUECOLORc { 
        gsave
        translate rotate scale /h exch def /w exch def
        /bitmapsave save def 
        
        /is w string def
        
        ws 0 w getinterval is copy pop 
        /cf currentfile def 
        w h 8 [w 0 0 h neg 0 h] 
        {ip} {gip} {bip} true 3 colorimage
        bitmapsave restore 
        grestore
        } bind def
/BITMAPTRUECOLOR { 
        gsave
        translate rotate scale /h exch def /w exch def
        /bitmapsave save def 
        /is w string def
        /gis w string def
        /bis w string def
        /cf currentfile def 
        w h 8 [w 0 0 h neg 0 h] 
        { cf is readhexstring pop } 
        { cf gis readhexstring pop } 
        { cf bis readhexstring pop } 
        true 3 colorimage 
        bitmapsave restore 
        grestore
        } bind def
/BITMAPTRUEGRAYc { 
        gsave
        translate rotate scale /h exch def /w exch def
        /bitmapsave save def 
        
        /is w string def
        
        ws 0 w getinterval is copy pop 
        /cf currentfile def 
        w h 8 [w 0 0 h neg 0 h] 
        {ip gip bip w gray} image
        bitmapsave restore 
        grestore
        } bind def
/ww FMLOCAL
/r FMLOCAL
/g FMLOCAL
/b FMLOCAL
/i FMLOCAL
/gray { 
        /ww exch def
        /b exch def
        /g exch def
        /r exch def
        0 1 ww 1 sub { /i exch def r i get .299 mul g i get .587 mul
			b i get .114 mul add add r i 3 -1 roll floor cvi put } for
        r
        } bind def
/BITMAPTRUEGRAY { 
        gsave
        translate rotate scale /h exch def /w exch def
        /bitmapsave save def 
        /is w string def
        /gis w string def
        /bis w string def
        /cf currentfile def 
        w h 8 [w 0 0 h neg 0 h] 
        { cf is readhexstring pop 
          cf gis readhexstring pop 
          cf bis readhexstring pop w gray}  image
        bitmapsave restore 
        grestore
        } bind def
/BITMAPGRAY { 
	8 {fakecolorsetup} COMMONBITMAP
	} bind def
/BITMAPGRAYc { 
	8 {fakecolorsetup} COMMONBITMAPc
	} bind def
/ENDBITMAP {
	} bind def
end 
	/ALDsave FMLOCAL
	/ALDmatrix matrix def ALDmatrix currentmatrix pop
/StartALD {
	/ALDsave save def
	 savematrix
	 ALDmatrix setmatrix
	} bind def
/InALD {
	 restorematrix
	} bind def
/DoneALD {
	 ALDsave restore
	} bind def
%%EndProlog
%%BeginSetup
(3.0) FMVERSION
1 1 612 792 0 1 12 FMDOCUMENT
0 0 /Times-Bold FMFONTDEFINE
1 1 /Symbol FMFONTDEFINE
2 0 /Times-Roman FMFONTDEFINE
3 0 /Times-BoldItalic FMFONTDEFINE
4 0 /Times-Italic FMFONTDEFINE
5 0 /Helvetica FMFONTDEFINE
32 FMFILLS
0 0 FMFILL
1 0.1 FMFILL
2 0.3 FMFILL
3 0.5 FMFILL
4 0.7 FMFILL
5 0.9 FMFILL
6 0.97 FMFILL
7 1 FMFILL
8 <0f1e3c78f0e1c387> FMFILL
9 <0f87c3e1f0783c1e> FMFILL
10 <cccccccccccccccc> FMFILL
11 <ffff0000ffff0000> FMFILL
12 <8142241818244281> FMFILL
13 <03060c183060c081> FMFILL
14 <8040201008040201> FMFILL
16 1 FMFILL
17 0.9 FMFILL
18 0.7 FMFILL
19 0.5 FMFILL
20 0.3 FMFILL
21 0.1 FMFILL
22 0.03 FMFILL
23 0 FMFILL
24 <f0e1c3870f1e3c78> FMFILL
25 <f0783c1e0f87c3e1> FMFILL
26 <3333333333333333> FMFILL
27 <0000ffff0000ffff> FMFILL
28 <7ebddbe7e7dbbd7e> FMFILL
29 <fcf9f3e7cf9f3f7e> FMFILL
30 <7fbfdfeff7fbfdfe> FMFILL
%%EndSetup
%%Page: "1" 1
%%BeginPaperSize: Letter
%%EndPaperSize
612 792 0 FMBEGINPAGE
108 81 540 81 2 L
7 X
0 K
V
0.25 H
2 Z
0 X
N
108 747 540 747 2 L
7 X
V
3 H
0 Z
0 X
N
108 46.88 441 63 R
7 X
V
0 10 Q
0 X
(2/5/93 04:23 pm) 108 56.33 T
(peeling%hermes.mod.uk@r) 178.24 56.33 T
(elay) 298.4 56.33 T
(.mod.uk) 315.07 56.33 T
468 46.88 540 63 R
7 X
V
0 X
(1 of 23) 511.69 56.33 T
108 81 567 711 R
7 X
V
0 24 Q
0 X
(Commonly Asked Questions \050andAnswers\051) 117.95 611 T
(about ANDF) 271.87 583 T
0 12 Q
(Dr) 283.42 443 T
(. R. R. Rowlingson) 296.3 443 T
(Dr) 295.08 429 T
(. N. E. Peeling) 307.96 429 T
(DRA Malvern UK) 290.53 415 T
( British Cr) 250.25 359 T
(own Copyright) 305.33 359 T
1 F
(\323) 388.29 359 T
0 F
( 1992) 397.77 359 T
FMENDPAGE
%%EndPage: "1" 2
%%Page: "2" 2
612 792 0 FMBEGINPAGE
108 45 414 61.12 R
7 X
0 K
V
0 10 Q
0 X
(Questions and Answers) 108 54.45 T
108 726.98 540 742.18 R
7 X
V
432 45 540 61.12 R
V
0 X
(2 of 23) 511.69 54.45 T
108 756 540 756 2 L
7 X
V
0.25 H
2 Z
0 X
N
108 81 540 81 2 L
7 X
V
0 X
N
108 90 540 720 R
7 X
V
0 24 Q
0 X
-1.2 (Index of Questions) 238.84 614 S
0 14 Q
(1. Backgr) 216 546.67 T
(ound to ANDF) 273.27 546.67 T
(, TDF and DRA) 359.83 546.67 T
(2. Commer) 216 516.67 T
(cial Aspects) 282.58 516.67 T
(3. ANDF and ISVs) 216 486.67 T
(4. ANDF and System V) 216 456.67 T
(endors) 353.46 456.67 T
(5. ANDF and end-users) 216 426.67 T
(6. T) 216 396.67 T
(echnical Questions) 238.04 396.67 T
FMENDPAGE
%%EndPage: "2" 3
%%Page: "3" 3
612 792 0 FMBEGINPAGE
108 45 414 61.12 R
7 X
0 K
V
0 10 Q
0 X
(Questions and Answers) 108 54.45 T
108 726.98 540 742.18 R
7 X
V
432 45 540 61.12 R
V
0 X
(3 of 23) 511.69 54.45 T
108 756 540 756 2 L
7 X
V
0.25 H
2 Z
0 X
N
108 81 540 81 2 L
7 X
V
0 X
N
108 90 540 720 R
7 X
V
0 24 Q
0 X
-1.2 (Questions) 278.75 704 S
0 14 Q
(1 Backgr) 108 666.67 T
(ound to ANDF) 161.77 666.67 T
(, TDF and DRA) 248.33 666.67 T
2 F
(1.1 What is ANDF?) 108 638.67 T
(1.2 What is TDF?) 108 610.67 T
(1.3 Who are DRA?) 108 582.67 T
(1.4 Which or) 108 554.67 T
(ganizations support ANDF?) 181.19 554.67 T
(1.5 Why are DRA developing TDF?) 108 526.67 T
(1.6 What is the history of TDF?) 108 498.67 T
(1.7 How much is being invested in TDF?) 108 470.67 T
(1.8 Is TDF an open speci\336cation?) 108 442.67 T
(1.9 Who controls TDF?) 108 414.67 T
(1.10 Has ANDF been oversold?) 108 386.67 T
0 F
(2 Commer) 108 356.67 T
(cial Aspects) 171.08 356.67 T
2 F
(2.1 How can I get hold of TDF?) 108 328.67 T
(2.2 What software is available?) 108 300.67 T
(2.3 What real-life experience is there in using ANDF?) 108 272.67 T
0 F
(3 ANDF and ISVs) 108 242.67 T
2 F
(3.1 Does ANDF protect proprietary information as well as a binary does?) 108 214.67 T
(3.2 Does ANDF make it much easier to pirate software?) 108 186.67 T
(3.3 How will ANDF af) 108 158.67 T
(fect an ISV\325) 237.16 158.67 T
(s ability to do dif) 304.77 158.67 T
(ferential pricing?) 400.14 158.67 T
(3.4 How does an ISV ensure quality if a customer can run a ANDF program) 108 130.67 T
(on a machine on which the ISV has not tested it?) 108 114.67 T
FMENDPAGE
%%EndPage: "3" 4
%%Page: "4" 4
612 792 0 FMBEGINPAGE
108 45 414 61.12 R
7 X
0 K
V
0 10 Q
0 X
(Questions and Answers) 108 54.45 T
108 726.98 540 742.18 R
7 X
V
432 45 540 61.12 R
V
0 X
(4 of 23) 511.69 54.45 T
108 756 540 756 2 L
7 X
V
0.25 H
2 Z
0 X
N
108 81 540 81 2 L
7 X
V
0 X
N
108 90 540 720 R
7 X
V
2 14 Q
0 X
(3.5 W) 108 710.67 T
(ill ANDF reduce testing costs?) 141.64 710.67 T
(3.6 If a shrink-wrapped application fails who does the customer blame?) 108 682.67 T
(3.7 How long does installation take?) 108 654.67 T
(3.8 How lar) 108 626.67 T
(ge is the distributed TDF compared to binary?) 174.2 626.67 T
(3.9 What are the performance costs of using TDF?) 108 598.67 T
(3.10 How long does it take to shrink-wrap an existing application?) 108 570.67 T
0 F
(4 ANDF and System V) 108 540.67 T
(endors) 241.96 540.67 T
2 F
(4.1 How much ef) 108 512.67 T
(fort does it take to implement a new installer?) 204.9 512.67 T
(4.2 How have DRA matched the performance of compilers which have) 108 484.67 T
-0.08 (taken many tens of staf) 108 468.67 P
-0.08 (f-years to develop with installers that have only taken) 237.22 468.67 P
(one or two staf) 108 452.67 T
(f-years to develop?) 191.3 452.67 T
(4.3 Do you have to use DRA technology to create a new TDF installer?) 108 424.67 T
0 F
(5 ANDF and End Users) 108 394.67 T
2 F
(5.1 How much will it cost?) 108 366.67 T
(5.2 Does ANDF help me with the problem of legacy systems?) 108 338.67 T
0 F
(6 T) 108 308.67 T
(echnical Questions) 126.54 308.67 T
2 F
(6.1 is ANDF is tied to UNIX?) 108 280.67 T
(6.2 How does ANDF relate to APIs?) 108 252.67 T
(6.3 How does ANDF relate to ABIs?) 108 224.67 T
-0.31 (6.4 How does ANDF relate to distribution of multiple binaries on CD-ROM?) 108 196.67 P
(6.5 How does ANDF relate to using shrouded C for distribution?) 108 168.67 T
(6.6 Is TDF a C oriented technology?) 108 140.67 T
(6.7 W) 108 112.67 T
(ill ANDF collapse as more languages and tar) 141.64 112.67 T
(gets are considered) 392.81 112.67 T
(\050remember UNCOL\051?) 108 96.67 T
FMENDPAGE
%%EndPage: "4" 5
%%Page: "5" 5
612 792 0 FMBEGINPAGE
108 45 414 61.12 R
7 X
0 K
V
0 10 Q
0 X
(Questions and Answers) 108 54.45 T
108 726.98 540 742.18 R
7 X
V
432 45 540 61.12 R
V
0 X
(5 of 23) 511.69 54.45 T
108 756 540 756 2 L
7 X
V
0.25 H
2 Z
0 X
N
108 81 540 81 2 L
7 X
V
0 X
N
108 90 540 720 R
7 X
V
2 14 Q
0 X
(6.8 W) 108 710.67 T
(ill operating systems be compiled using ANDF?) 141.64 710.67 T
(6.9 Is TDF suitable for parallel computers?) 108 682.67 T
FMENDPAGE
%%EndPage: "5" 6
%%Page: "6" 6
612 792 0 FMBEGINPAGE
108 45 414 61.12 R
7 X
0 K
V
0 10 Q
0 X
(Questions and Answers) 108 54.45 T
108 726.98 540 742.18 R
7 X
V
0 8 Q
0 X
(Backgr) 108 736.84 T
(ound to ANDF) 132.73 736.84 T
(, TDF and DRA) 182.19 736.84 T
432 45 540 61.12 R
7 X
V
0 10 Q
0 X
(6 of 23) 511.69 54.45 T
108 756 540 756 2 L
7 X
V
0.25 H
2 Z
0 X
N
108 81 540 81 2 L
7 X
V
0 X
N
108 90 540 720 R
7 X
V
0 24 Q
0 X
-1.2 (Questions \050and Answers\051) 209.86 704 S
108 636.98 540 640 C
90 638.49 558 638.49 2 L
0.25 H
2 Z
0 X
0 K
N
0 0 612 792 C
3 16 Q
0 X
0 K
(1. Background to ANDF) 108 645.33 T
(, TDF and DRA) 268.54 645.33 T
0 14 Q
(1.1 What is ANDF?) 108 589.64 T
2 F
(ANDF stands for Architecture Neutral Distribution Format. The concept of) 108 560.64 T
(an ANDF was pioneered by the Open Software Foundation \050OSF\051. The OSF) 108 544.64 T
(issued a Request For T) 108 528.64 T
(echnology \050RFT\051 in May 1989 to solicit proposals for) 235.27 528.64 T
(technologies that might form the basis of their ANDF; OSF received 23) 108 512.64 T
(such proposals.) 108 496.64 T
(The objective of ANDF is to encourage the development of a lar) 108 468.64 T
(ge body of) 468.75 468.64 T
(\324shrink-wrapped\325 applications capable of running on any Open Systems) 108 452.64 T
(platform which implements the necessary libraries \050APIs\051.) 108 436.64 T
0 F
( 1.2 What is TDF?) 108 384.64 T
2 F
(TDF is an ANDF technology) 108 355.64 T
(, designed and implemented at DRA Malvern.) 270.33 355.64 T
(In June 1991 DRA) 108 339.64 T
(\325) 211.77 339.64 T
(s TDF technology was selected to be the basis of the) 215.66 339.64 T
(OSF\325) 108 323.64 T
(s ANDF) 137.55 323.64 T
(.) 183.46 323.64 T
(TDF represents an evolution of multi-language, multi-tar) 108 295.64 T
(get compiler) 426.82 295.64 T
(intermediate languages. If there are) 108 279.64 T
4 F
(n) 309.27 279.64 T
2 F
( programming languages and) 316.26 279.64 T
4 F
(m) 482.59 279.64 T
2 F
(machines then instead of needing the product of) 108 263.64 T
4 F
(n) 380.02 263.64 T
2 F
( and) 387.02 263.64 T
4 F
(m) 414.22 263.64 T
2 F
( compilers one only) 424.32 263.64 T
(needs the sum \050) 108 247.64 T
4 F
(n+m) 195.44 247.64 T
2 F
(\051 \322half compilers\323. OSF refer to the) 221.98 247.64 T
4 F
(n) 424.04 247.64 T
2 F
( front-ends which) 431.04 247.64 T
(compile the programming languages into ANDF as) 108 231.64 T
4 F
(pr) 398.31 231.64 T
(oducers) 410.23 231.64 T
2 F
(, and the) 454.53 231.64 T
4 F
(m) 505.83 231.64 T
2 F
(back-ends, which translate ANDF into the machine code of the dif) 108 215.64 T
(ferent) 479.64 215.64 T
(machines, as) 108 199.64 T
4 F
(installers) 183 199.64 T
2 F
(.) 235.09 199.64 T
(The TDF technology provides software developers with an environment to) 108 171.64 T
(create portable applications. It provides mechanisms for de\336ning the) 108 155.64 T
(portability interface which an application will use so that the application can) 108 139.64 T
(run unchanged on any computer that implements that interface. This) 108 123.64 T
FMENDPAGE
%%EndPage: "6" 7
%%Page: "7" 7
612 792 0 FMBEGINPAGE
108 45 414 61.12 R
7 X
0 K
V
0 10 Q
0 X
(Questions and Answers) 108 54.45 T
108 726.98 540 742.18 R
7 X
V
0 8 Q
0 X
(Backgr) 108 736.84 T
(ound to ANDF) 132.73 736.84 T
(, TDF and DRA) 182.19 736.84 T
432 45 540 61.12 R
7 X
V
0 10 Q
0 X
(7 of 23) 511.69 54.45 T
108 756 540 756 2 L
7 X
V
0.25 H
2 Z
0 X
N
108 81 540 81 2 L
7 X
V
0 X
N
108 90 540 720 R
7 X
V
2 14 Q
0 X
(mechanism can also be used to de\336ne architecture neutral header \336les for) 108 710.67 T
(common APIs such as POSIX, XPG3, SVID and the AES) 108 694.67 T
(The document \322ANDF Features and Bene\336ts\323 gives a more detailed answer) 108 666.67 T
(to this question.) 108 650.67 T
0 F
( 1.3 Who ar) 108 598.67 T
(e DRA?) 177.71 598.67 T
2 F
(The UK Defence Research Agency \050DRA\051 was established as an Executive) 108 569.67 T
(Agency of the UK Ministry of Defence on 1st April 1991. It is wholly) 108 553.67 T
(owned by the UK government but is a distinct or) 108 537.67 T
(ganization headed by a) 380.96 537.67 T
(Chief Executive who derives his authority from, and is directly accountable) 108 521.67 T
(to, the Secretary of State for Defence.) 108 505.67 T
(The aim of the DRA is to provide the expert scienti\336c and technical services) 108 477.67 T
(required of it, primarily by the Ministry of Defence and Other Government) 108 461.67 T
(Departments in a way which is cost-ef) 108 445.67 T
(fective and impartial; in support of) 322.25 445.67 T
(this, the DRA is also encouraged to provide services to non-government) 108 429.67 T
(customers. The DRA is expected to continue to be the MoD\325) 108 413.67 T
(s principal) 447.27 413.67 T
(source of scienti\336c advice, technical support and research.) 108 397.67 T
(DRA) 108 369.67 T
(\325) 135.99 369.67 T
(s \322turnover\323 is approximately a billion dollars per annum.) 139.87 369.67 T
(DRA Malvern, formerly known as RSRE, is the Agency\325) 108 341.67 T
(s main centre for) 427.46 341.67 T
(work on information technology and electronic systems and devices and on) 108 325.67 T
(their defence applications. It is staf) 108 309.67 T
(fed by approximately 800 high calibre) 303.6 309.67 T
(scientists and engineers from many disciplines working at the frontiers of) 108 293.67 T
(scienti\336c knowledge.) 108 277.67 T
0 F
( 1.4 Which organizations support ANDF?) 108 225.67 T
2 F
(The OSF has an advanced technology program in their Research Institute) 108 196.67 T
(covering ANDF) 108 180.67 T
(. UNIX System Labs \050USL\051 have signed a letter of) 197.43 180.67 T
(understanding with DRA to license the TDF technology) 108 164.67 T
(. The European) 420.73 164.67 T
(Commission is supporting the Esprit GLUE project. Many other) 108 148.67 T
(or) 108 132.67 T
(ganizations from market leaders to standards bodies and industry) 119.4 132.67 T
(groupings have shown interest and have of) 108 116.67 T
(fered support to the ANDF) 347.13 116.67 T
(project.) 108 100.67 T
FMENDPAGE
%%EndPage: "7" 8
%%Page: "8" 8
612 792 0 FMBEGINPAGE
108 45 414 61.12 R
7 X
0 K
V
0 10 Q
0 X
(Questions and Answers) 108 54.45 T
108 726.98 540 742.18 R
7 X
V
0 8 Q
0 X
(Backgr) 108 736.84 T
(ound to ANDF) 132.73 736.84 T
(, TDF and DRA) 182.19 736.84 T
432 45 540 61.12 R
7 X
V
0 10 Q
0 X
(8 of 23) 511.69 54.45 T
108 756 540 756 2 L
7 X
V
0.25 H
2 Z
0 X
N
108 81 540 81 2 L
7 X
V
0 X
N
108 90 540 720 R
7 X
V
0 14 Q
0 X
( 1.5 Why ar) 108 710.67 T
(e DRA developing TDF?) 177.71 710.67 T
2 F
(The Ministry of Defence is a lar) 108 681.67 T
(ge end-user of computer systems. Through) 287.27 681.67 T
(the widespread uptake of ANDF DRA aims to reduce the costs for software) 108 665.67 T
(development and software and hardware procurement for the MoD. Related) 108 649.67 T
(goals include the potential for early availability of compilers \050e.g. for Ada\051) 108 633.67 T
(on new architectures, separating software and hardware purchasing, easier) 108 617.67 T
-0.3 (mid-life hardware updates, and improving software longevity and scalability) 108 601.67 P
-0.3 (.) 533.31 601.67 P
(By providing TDF as the de-facto standard ANDF technology DRA ensures) 108 573.67 T
(that MoD has access to a civil standard which can also handle defence) 108 557.67 T
(requirements such as support for Ada.) 108 541.67 T
0 F
( 1.6 What is the history of TDF?) 108 489.67 T
2 F
(TDF is derived from the T) 108 460.67 T
(en15 project at DRA Malvern. The T) 255.09 460.67 T
(en15 project) 462.01 460.67 T
(was a 50 staf) 108 444.67 T
(f year project which involved the de\336nition and) 180.41 444.67 T
(implementation of a high-level abstract machine. Like TDF it was an) 108 428.67 T
(architecture neutral representation of programming languages but it was) 108 412.67 T
(strongly typed and also had the capability to describe operating system) 108 396.67 T
(features, such as the network and \336lestore, explicitly) 108 380.67 T
(. TDF was conceived as) 401.27 380.67 T
(a portable code-generator for T) 108 364.67 T
(en15 and was purpose-built to the) 281.85 364.67 T
(requirements for creating and distributing shrink-wrapped software.) 108 348.67 T
0 F
( 1.7 How much is being invested in TDF?) 108 296.67 T
2 F
(DRA has a team of 15 people plus 7 contractors currently working on TDF) 108 267.67 T
(.) 526.97 267.67 T
(OSF and USL also have technical staf) 108 251.67 T
(f working to develop the technology) 320.71 251.67 T
(.) 523.05 251.67 T
(DRA are one of seven participants in a 3 year) 108 235.67 T
(, $15 million, ESPRIT project) 362.73 235.67 T
(known as OMI/GLUE which also includes work on developing producers) 108 219.67 T
(\050compilers to ANDF\051 for Ada, Fortran, C++ and a functional language as) 108 203.67 T
(well as work on validation, TDF tools and extending TDF for parallelism.) 108 187.67 T
(OSF and USL are working with ISVs to demonstrate the viability of the) 108 159.67 T
(ANDF approach to shrink wrapping existing applications.) 108 143.67 T
FMENDPAGE
%%EndPage: "8" 9
%%Page: "9" 9
612 792 0 FMBEGINPAGE
108 45 414 61.12 R
7 X
0 K
V
0 10 Q
0 X
(Questions and Answers) 108 54.45 T
108 726.98 540 742.18 R
7 X
V
0 8 Q
0 X
(Backgr) 108 736.84 T
(ound to ANDF) 132.73 736.84 T
(, TDF and DRA) 182.19 736.84 T
432 45 540 61.12 R
7 X
V
0 10 Q
0 X
(9 of 23) 511.69 54.45 T
108 756 540 756 2 L
7 X
V
0.25 H
2 Z
0 X
N
108 81 540 81 2 L
7 X
V
0 X
N
108 90 540 720 R
7 X
V
0 14 Q
0 X
( 1.8 Is TDF an open speci\336cation?) 108 710.67 T
2 F
(The speci\336cation of TDF is freely available from DRA. All the Intellectual) 108 681.67 T
(Property contained in the TDF speci\336cation is in the Public Domain. DRA) 108 665.67 T
(takes no royalties for any use of the speci\336cation. The TDF encoding as a) 108 649.67 T
(bitstream is also in the public domain as is software for encoding and) 108 633.67 T
(decoding TDF) 108 617.67 T
(. The other TDF tools \050which are proprietary\051 work from a) 188.11 617.67 T
(central database that speci\336es TDF - this database is also in the public) 108 601.67 T
(domain.) 108 585.67 T
0 F
( 1.9 Who contr) 108 533.67 T
(ols TDF?) 196.36 533.67 T
2 F
(TDF is a technology owned and controlled by the DRA. It forms the basis) 108 504.67 T
(of the OSF\325) 108 488.67 T
(s ANDF technology) 173.3 488.67 T
(. USL and OSF have publicly announced) 285.1 488.67 T
(that they will support the same speci\336cation. The latest versions of TDF and) 108 472.67 T
(ANDF are identical.) 108 456.67 T
(DRA intends to submit TDF\325) 108 428.67 T
(s de\336nition to an internationally recognized) 271.26 428.67 T
(standards process once TDF has proven its viability in the market place. At) 108 412.67 T
(such time DRA will cede control of the TDF speci\336cation to the appropriate) 108 396.67 T
(standards body/bodies.) 108 380.67 T
0 F
( 1.10 Has ANDF been oversold?) 108 328.67 T
2 F
(Many of the properties of ANDF \050the concept\051 are now inextricably linked) 108 299.67 T
(to the properties of TDF \050an ANDF technology\051. Until OSF had selected) 108 283.67 T
(TDF it was dif) 108 267.67 T
(\336cult to say exactly what were the expected properties of) 189.76 267.67 T
(ANDF and this did lead to some confusion. It is now clear that ANDF as) 108 251.67 T
(implemented by TDF is much more than just a distribution format - it is also) 108 235.67 T
(an aid in recasting applications in shrink-wrapped form, and it is also an) 108 219.67 T
(architecture-neutral medium for creating header \336les for APIs.) 108 203.67 T
(Some complex issues may have been oversimpli\336ed, such as the issue of) 108 175.67 T
(reverse-engineering ANDF) 108 159.67 T
(. The latest documentation from DRA and OSF) 259.58 159.67 T
(avoids such oversimpli\336cations.) 108 143.67 T
FMENDPAGE
%%EndPage: "9" 10
%%Page: "10" 10
612 792 0 FMBEGINPAGE
108 45 414 61.12 R
7 X
0 K
V
0 10 Q
0 X
(Questions and Answers) 108 54.45 T
108 726.98 540 742.18 R
7 X
V
0 8 Q
0 X
(Commer) 108 736.84 T
(cial Aspects) 138.05 736.84 T
432 45 540 61.12 R
7 X
V
0 10 Q
0 X
(10 of 23) 506.69 54.45 T
108 756 540 756 2 L
7 X
V
0.25 H
2 Z
0 X
N
108 81 540 81 2 L
7 X
V
0 X
N
108 90 540 720 R
7 X
V
108 700.98 540 704 C
90 702.49 558 702.49 2 L
0.25 H
2 Z
0 X
0 K
N
0 0 612 792 C
3 16 Q
0 X
0 K
(2. Commercial Aspects) 108 709.33 T
0 14 Q
(2.1 How can I get hold of TDF?) 108 653.64 T
2 F
(Software availability is currently through the OSF snapshot program, for) 108 624.64 T
(further details contact Andy Johnson at the OSF Research Institute at 1) 108 608.64 T
(Cambridge Center) 108 592.64 T
(, Cambridge MA, USA. email: andyj@osf.or) 210.42 592.64 T
(g) 462.08 592.64 T
(DRA are also looking into possible mechanisms for distributing a) 108 564.64 T
(developers kit.) 108 548.64 T
0 F
( 2.2 What TDF softwar) 108 496.64 T
(e is available?) 245.71 496.64 T
2 F
(DRA are maintaining installers for MIPS, 680X0, 80X86 and SP) 108 467.64 T
(ARC. OSF) 470.11 467.64 T
(has had an RS 6000 installer developed under contract. A TDF producer) 108 451.64 T
(from ANSI C and other dialects has also been written. A TDF linker) 108 435.64 T
(program, TDF pretty-printer) 108 419.64 T
(, TDF installation manager and a compiler) 266.38 419.64 T
(interface to UNIX, known as tcc, are also implemented. There are) 108 403.64 T
(architecture neutral C header \336les for POSIX, XPG3 and SVID3. This) 108 387.64 T
(software has been suf) 108 371.64 T
(\336cient to allow the shrink-wrapping of \322real-life\323) 228.59 371.64 T
(applications such as Informix\325) 108 355.64 T
(s W) 277.05 355.64 T
(ingz product.) 298.64 355.64 T
0 F
( 2.3 What r) 108 303.64 T
(eal-life experience is ther) 175.37 303.64 T
(e in using ANDF?) 323.94 303.64 T
2 F
(DRA has successfully transferred the installer technology out of the lab -) 108 274.64 T
(the Sun SP) 108 258.64 T
(ARC installer was written under contract to DRA and achieved) 168.14 258.64 T
(better performance tar) 108 242.64 T
(gets than the installers written in-house. OSF have) 232.07 242.64 T
(ported and demonstrated Informix\325) 108 226.64 T
(s\325 W) 303.47 226.64 T
(ingz \050TM\051 on ANDF) 329.72 226.64 T
(. USL and OSF) 445.58 226.64 T
(are collaborating on an ISV program to encourage ports of major) 108 210.64 T
(commercial applications to ANDF on SVR4.2, starting with Oracle, and) 108 194.64 T
(DRA supports and assists in this important area. In addition DRA and OSF) 108 178.64 T
(are working to shrink wrap a number of public domain applications such as) 108 162.64 T
(the Postgres database.) 108 146.64 T
(The TDF software has been successfully tested on a lar) 108 118.64 T
(ge body of software,) 416.67 118.64 T
(which includes:) 108 102.64 T
FMENDPAGE
%%EndPage: "10" 11
%%Page: "11" 11
612 792 0 FMBEGINPAGE
108 45 414 61.12 R
7 X
0 K
V
0 10 Q
0 X
(Questions and Answers) 108 54.45 T
108 726.98 540 742.18 R
7 X
V
0 8 Q
0 X
(ANDF and ISVs) 108 736.84 T
432 45 540 61.12 R
7 X
V
0 10 Q
0 X
(11 of 23) 506.69 54.45 T
108 756 540 756 2 L
7 X
V
0.25 H
2 Z
0 X
N
108 81 540 81 2 L
7 X
V
0 X
N
108 90 540 720 R
7 X
V
5 12 Q
0 X
(\245) 108 712 T
(bootstrapping the TDF software) 121.54 712 T
(\245) 108 686 T
(the Plum-Hall test suite) 121.54 686 T
(\245) 108 660 T
(the Perennial test suite) 121.54 660 T
(\245) 108 634 T
(SPEC C Benchmarks) 121.54 634 T
(\245) 108 608 T
(Motif Window Manager) 121.54 608 T
(\245) 108 582 T
(Gnu Emacs) 121.54 582 T
(\245) 108 556 T
(Wingz) 121.54 556 T
(\245) 108 530 T
(Perl) 121.54 530 T
(\245) 108 504 T
(gcc 2.2.2) 121.54 504 T
(\245) 108 478 T
(T) 121.54 478 T
(eX and Metafont) 127.53 478 T
(\245) 108 452 T
(X\336g) 121.54 452 T
(\245) 108 426 T
(X1) 121.54 426 T
(1R5) 135.32 426 T
(\245) 108 400 T
(Modula 3 to C compiler) 121.54 400 T
(\245) 108 374 T
(Postgres) 121.54 374 T
(\245) 108 348 T
(GhostScript) 121.54 348 T
(\245) 108 322 T
(Bison) 121.54 322 T
108 262.98 540 266 C
90 264.49 558 264.49 2 L
0.25 H
2 Z
0 X
0 K
N
0 0 612 792 C
3 16 Q
0 X
0 K
(3. ANDF and ISVs) 108 271.33 T
0 14 Q
(3.1 Does ANDF pr) 108 215.64 T
(otect pr) 217.34 215.64 T
(oprietary information as well as binary does?) 263.32 215.64 T
2 F
(There are two separate issues that should be distinguished when discussing) 108 186.64 T
(the reverse engineering of ANDF:) 108 170.64 T
(\0501\051 how easy is the process of reverse engineering?) 108 142.64 T
(\0502\051 how understandable an output can be produced from a reverse) 108 114.64 T
(engineering process or tool?) 108 98.64 T
FMENDPAGE
%%EndPage: "11" 12
%%Page: "12" 12
612 792 0 FMBEGINPAGE
108 45 414 61.12 R
7 X
0 K
V
0 10 Q
0 X
(Questions and Answers) 108 54.45 T
108 726.98 540 742.18 R
7 X
V
0 8 Q
0 X
(ANDF and ISVs) 108 736.84 T
432 45 540 61.12 R
7 X
V
0 10 Q
0 X
(12 of 23) 506.69 54.45 T
108 756 540 756 2 L
7 X
V
0.25 H
2 Z
0 X
N
108 81 540 81 2 L
7 X
V
0 X
N
108 90 540 720 R
7 X
V
2 14 Q
0 X
(ANDF is such an attractive tar) 108 710.67 T
(get to reverse engineer that we would expect) 278.34 710.67 T
(reverse engineering tools to become available, regardless of how dif) 108 694.67 T
(\336cult it) 489.33 694.67 T
(is to produce such tools. This makes point \0501\051 above irrelevant \050in fact TDF) 108 678.67 T
(is somewhat easier to reverse engineer than a binary\051. The important fact is) 108 662.67 T
(that the quality of information recoverable from TDF is very similar to that) 108 646.67 T
(recoverable from binary - rearranged source text without identi\336ers \050what) 108 630.67 T
(others have sometimes referred to as \322ugli\336ed\323 or \322shrouded\323 source\051. It) 108 614.67 T
(would certainly be possible to scramble the ANDF to make it even uglier) 108 598.67 T
(. If) 516.84 598.67 T
(an ISV does not regard this as adequate protection we would suggest that) 108 582.67 T
(the shrink-wrapped ANDF be converted to binaries for \336nal distribution.) 108 566.67 T
0 F
( 3.2 Does ANDF make it much easier to pirate softwar) 108 514.67 T
(e?) 429.89 514.67 T
2 F
(A shrink-wrapped application in ANDF can obviously be pirated to many) 108 485.67 T
(platforms. W) 108 469.67 T
(e would expect that many ISVs will use licensing control) 180.72 469.67 T
(software to protect against such theft. This is an issue that the industry is) 108 453.67 T
(already grappling with - ANDF just makes it more ur) 108 437.67 T
(gent that workable) 405.83 437.67 T
(solutions be widely implemented.) 108 421.67 T
0 F
( 3.3 How will ANDF affect an ISV\325) 108 369.67 T
(s ability to do differ) 314.23 369.67 T
(ential pricing?) 431.36 369.67 T
2 F
(This is already an issue that the industry faces. In machine ranges which are) 108 340.67 T
(binary compatible it is already common for licenses fees to vary for the) 108 324.67 T
(same binary distribution \050license fees being tied to processor power) 108 308.67 T
(,) 485.55 308.67 T
(numbers of concurrent users etc.\051.) 108 292.67 T
0 F
( 3.4 How does an ISV ensur) 108 184.67 T
(e quality if a customer can run an ANDF) 272.17 184.67 T
(pr) 108 167.67 T
(ogram on a machine on which the ISV has not tested it?) 121.74 167.67 T
2 F
(It is likely that as applications start to be shipped in ANDF that they will) 108 138.67 T
(have been tested by the ISV on many tar) 108 122.67 T
(gets. The machines that the) 334.69 122.67 T
(application has been tested on can be listed on the packaging and the) 108 106.67 T
FMENDPAGE
%%EndPage: "12" 13
%%Page: "13" 13
612 792 0 FMBEGINPAGE
108 45 414 61.12 R
7 X
0 K
V
0 10 Q
0 X
(Questions and Answers) 108 54.45 T
108 726.98 540 742.18 R
7 X
V
0 8 Q
0 X
(ANDF and ISVs) 108 736.84 T
432 45 540 61.12 R
7 X
V
0 10 Q
0 X
(13 of 23) 506.69 54.45 T
108 756 540 756 2 L
7 X
V
0.25 H
2 Z
0 X
N
108 81 540 81 2 L
7 X
V
0 X
N
108 90 540 720 R
7 X
V
2 14 Q
0 X
(product need not be warranted for use on any others. As new architectures) 108 710.67 T
(come onto the market, the system vendor will wish to provide an installer) 108 694.67 T
(,) 519.01 694.67 T
(so that ANDF applications are available to customers. The onus will then be) 108 678.67 T
(on the installer writer to ensure that it is a robust and validated product. The) 108 662.67 T
(situation is analogous to the PC world where software developers cannot) 108 646.67 T
(test on every PC clone that exists but are con\336dent, through testing on the) 108 630.67 T
(most important in the market, that the product is likely to work on most) 108 614.67 T
(clones.) 108 598.67 T
0 F
( 3.5 W) 108 546.67 T
(ill ANDF r) 146.23 546.67 T
(educe testing costs?) 209.71 546.67 T
2 F
(Even if speci\336c platform testing by ISVs continues the ISVs\325 testing costs) 108 517.67 T
(could still be signi\336cantly reduced. T) 108 501.67 T
(esting costs are related to the number) 315.34 501.67 T
(of problems encountered during testing and are often due to compiler bugs) 108 485.67 T
(or dif) 108 469.67 T
(ferent interpretations of the high-level programming language being) 138.45 469.67 T
(compiled. ANDF can reduce these costs through the use of a single) 108 453.67 T
(compiler front-end - the producer - for a particular language. The installer) 108 437.67 T
(,) 520.87 437.67 T
(which translates ANDF to code, has much simpler syntax and semantics to) 108 421.67 T
(contend with than for C, so the validation of installer semantics should be) 108 405.67 T
(easier and more reliable than relying on the consistency and robustness of) 108 389.67 T
(dif) 108 373.67 T
(ferent C compilers. Also a lar) 123.29 373.67 T
(ge body of shrink-wrapped applications will) 288.58 373.67 T
(make it easy to test new installers.) 108 357.67 T
0 F
( 3.6 If a shrink-wrapped application fails who does the customer blame?) 108 305.67 T
2 F
(This question was addressed by question 3.4. The issue with ANDF is) 108 276.67 T
(exactly analogous to that faced by suppliers of PC software, and that has not) 108 260.67 T
(stopped ISVs from marketing PC software - indeed the possibility of) 108 244.67 T
(shipping shrink-wrapped applications is often quoted as the reason for the) 108 228.67 T
(strength of the PC market.) 108 212.67 T
0 F
( 3.7 How long does installation take?) 108 160.67 T
2 F
(Installation time, for an application, is generally somewhat less than the) 108 131.67 T
(compile time for a native compiler) 108 115.67 T
(. On gcc, from the SPEC tests,) 301.15 115.67 T
(installation time varies between 32% and 83% of native compile time on) 108 99.67 T
FMENDPAGE
%%EndPage: "13" 14
%%Page: "14" 14
612 792 0 FMBEGINPAGE
108 45 414 61.12 R
7 X
0 K
V
0 10 Q
0 X
(Questions and Answers) 108 54.45 T
108 726.98 540 742.18 R
7 X
V
0 8 Q
0 X
(ANDF and ISVs) 108 736.84 T
432 45 540 61.12 R
7 X
V
0 10 Q
0 X
(14 of 23) 506.69 54.45 T
108 756 540 756 2 L
7 X
V
0.25 H
2 Z
0 X
N
108 81 540 81 2 L
7 X
V
0 X
N
108 90 540 720 R
7 X
V
2 14 Q
0 X
(DRA) 108 710.67 T
(\325) 135.99 710.67 T
(s installers for 386, HP-P) 139.87 710.67 T
(A, MIPS, SP) 279.67 710.67 T
(ARC and V) 350.7 710.67 T
(AX architectures. An) 414.96 710.67 T
(example from the W) 108 694.67 T
(ingz application is that a complete build from source on) 222.85 694.67 T
(a DecStation 3100 using the native compiler took about one hour and thirty) 108 678.67 T
(minutes. An ANDF install on the same platform took approximately twenty) 108 662.67 T
(one minutes.) 108 646.67 T
(For many users / applications the install time will not be a problem. If it is) 108 618.67 T
(there are a number of possible solutions:) 108 602.67 T
5 12 Q
(\245) 108 576 T
(installation may be run as a background task \050on an operating system that) 121.54 576 T
(permits multi-tasking\051.) 121.54 562 T
(\245) 108 536 T
(installation may be done overnight.) 121.54 536 T
(\245) 108 510 T
(binary distribution may be available \050possibly at extra cost from a software) 121.54 510 T
(distributor\051. CD-ROMs may provide a convenient mechanism for marketing) 121.54 496 T
(binary versions of applications, as might ISDNs.) 121.54 482 T
(\245) 108 456 T
(if a user is part of a network, there may be a node that has responsibility for) 121.54 456 T
(turning ANDF applications into binaries for other users on the network.) 121.54 442 T
0 14 Q
( 3.8 How large is the distributed TDF compar) 108 390.67 T
(ed to binary?) 379.42 390.67 T
2 F
(This depends on the nature of the machine. On CISC machines the) 108 361.67 T
(distributed TDF is around twice the size of the binary) 108 345.67 T
(. On RISC machines) 406.72 345.67 T
(the distributed TDF \050same size as on CISC machines!\051 is around 1.4 times) 108 329.67 T
(the size of the corresponding binary produced by the native compiler) 108 313.67 T
(. This) 492.72 313.67 T
(\336gure assumes that architecture neutral headers are being used - if existing) 108 297.67 T
(header \336les are used the size of distributed ANDF can increase by up to) 108 281.67 T
(50% for some applications.) 108 265.67 T
0 F
( 3.9 What ar) 108 213.67 T
(e the performance costs of using TDF?) 182.37 213.67 T
2 F
(DRA has demonstrated that the run-time performance of applications) 108 184.67 T
(compiled from C through TDF can be made comparable and in some cases) 108 168.67 T
(faster than for applications compiled through native compilers. The) 108 152.67 T
(information in the source language required to do code optimization is) 108 136.67 T
(preserved in TDF allowing the fullest range of code optimization algorithms) 108 120.67 T
(to be used. The performance of existing implementations is given in the) 108 104.67 T
FMENDPAGE
%%EndPage: "14" 15
%%Page: "15" 15
612 792 0 FMBEGINPAGE
108 45 414 61.12 R
7 X
0 K
V
0 10 Q
0 X
(Questions and Answers) 108 54.45 T
108 726.98 540 742.18 R
7 X
V
0 8 Q
0 X
(ANDF and System V) 108 736.84 T
(endors) 178.55 736.84 T
432 45 540 61.12 R
7 X
V
0 10 Q
0 X
(15 of 23) 506.69 54.45 T
108 756 540 756 2 L
7 X
V
0.25 H
2 Z
0 X
N
108 81 540 81 2 L
7 X
V
0 X
N
108 90 540 720 R
7 X
V
2 14 Q
0 X
(document \324TDF Facts and Figures\325. All installer implementations are) 108 710.67 T
(currently within 5% of the performance of native compilers as measured on) 108 694.67 T
(the SPEC tests.) 108 678.67 T
(ANDF has signi\336cant economic advantages which may lead to performance) 108 650.67 T
(improvements - the cost of tuning an installer potentially bene\336ts all the) 108 634.67 T
(programming languages that compile to ANDF; also the ef) 108 618.67 T
(fort in tuning an) 437.31 618.67 T
(installer for one machine may bene\336t other installers \050many optimizations) 108 602.67 T
(can be expressed portably as TDF-to-TDF transformations\051.) 108 586.67 T
0 F
( 3.10 How long does it take to shrink-wrap an existing application?) 108 534.67 T
2 F
(There is as yet limited experience as to how much ef) 108 505.67 T
(fort a software) 402.3 505.67 T
(developer should expect to have to expend in such a recasting. OSF\325) 108 489.67 T
(s) 490.4 489.67 T
(experience shrink wrapping Informix\325) 108 473.67 T
(s W) 320.56 473.67 T
(ingz \050TM\051 product and DRA) 342.15 473.67 T
(\325) 501.48 473.67 T
(s) 505.37 473.67 T
(experience shrink wrapping public domain applications suggests that the) 108 457.67 T
(creation of a shrink wrapped version of an application takes roughly the) 108 441.67 T
(same amount of time as doing a port to a new platform. Once an application) 108 425.67 T
(has been shrink-wrapped, its ability to run on a given platform is) 108 409.67 T
(constrained only by the availability on that platform of implementations of) 108 393.67 T
(all the portability interfaces which the application requires.) 108 377.67 T
108 317.98 540 321 C
90 319.49 558 319.49 2 L
0.25 H
2 Z
0 X
0 K
N
0 0 612 792 C
3 16 Q
0 X
0 K
(4. ANDF and System V) 108 326.33 T
(endors) 260.38 326.33 T
0 14 Q
(4.1 How much effort does it take to implement a new installer?) 108 270.64 T
2 F
(The TDF technology is designed to allow new high-performance installers) 108 241.64 T
(to be implemented economically) 108 225.64 T
(. T) 290.14 225.64 T
(o achieve this as many optimizations as) 304.7 225.64 T
(possible - both universally applicable optimizations and machine speci\336c) 108 209.64 T
(ones - are carried out as TDF-to-TDF transformations. As a measure of the) 108 193.64 T
(ef) 108 177.64 T
(fort to produce a new installer: the existing SP) 118.62 177.64 T
(ARC installer was) 376.95 177.64 T
(implemented by a DRA contractor to a level where it equals the) 108 161.64 T
(performance of the best C compilers on a SUN SparcStation in one staf) 108 145.64 T
(f-) 507.24 145.64 T
(year) 108 129.64 T
(. The implementation was performed by an experienced compiler writer) 131.31 129.64 T
(who was familiar with SP) 108 113.64 T
(ARC but who had not worked with TDF before.) 251.29 113.64 T
FMENDPAGE
%%EndPage: "15" 16
%%Page: "16" 16
612 792 0 FMBEGINPAGE
108 45 414 61.12 R
7 X
0 K
V
0 10 Q
0 X
(Questions and Answers) 108 54.45 T
108 726.98 540 742.18 R
7 X
V
0 8 Q
0 X
(ANDF and System V) 108 736.84 T
(endors) 178.55 736.84 T
432 45 540 61.12 R
7 X
V
0 10 Q
0 X
(16 of 23) 506.69 54.45 T
108 756 540 756 2 L
7 X
V
0.25 H
2 Z
0 X
N
108 81 540 81 2 L
7 X
V
0 X
N
108 90 540 720 R
7 X
V
2 14 Q
0 X
(The implementation was produced at a site remote from DRA with less than) 108 710.67 T
(a week\325) 108 694.67 T
(s consultancy from DRA.) 151.12 694.67 T
0 F
(4.2 How has DRA matched the performance of compilers which have) 108 642.67 T
(taken many tens of staff-years to develop \050for example the MIPS) 108 625.67 T
(compiler on the DecStation and the native compiler on the 80x86) 108 608.67 T
(running SVR4.2\051 with installers that have only taken one or two staff-) 108 591.67 T
(years to develop?) 108 574.67 T
2 F
(W) 108 545.67 T
(e cannot know for sure but the following factors may be relevant:) 120.09 545.67 T
5 12 Q
(\245) 108 519 T
(the approach adopted by DRA is a conventional engineering approach \050it is) 121.54 519 T
(not an automated code generator technology\051 which reuses large amounts of) 121.54 505 T
(code between installers. This means that:) 121.54 491 T
2 10 Q
(\245) 126 468 T
2 12 Q
( as much of 70% of a new installer is re-used code) 144 468 T
2 10 Q
(\245) 126 444 T
2 12 Q
( the installer being hand-crafted is easy to tune) 144 444 T
2 10 Q
(\245) 126 420 T
2 12 Q
( the installer implementation is small enough be done by one person \050a very) 144 420 T
(ef) 144 405 T
(\336cient method of working\051.) 153.1 405 T
5 F
(\245) 108 378 T
(the staf) 121.54 378 T
(f used to implement the installers were very experienced and shared) 160.66 378 T
(experiences within a close-knit community) 121.54 364 T
(.) 344.59 364 T
(\245) 108 338 T
(DRA implementors had access to existing high-performance compilers which) 121.54 338 T
(showed a large number of the optimizations which had to be implemented.) 121.54 324 T
0 14 Q
( 4.3 Do you have to use DRA technology to cr) 108 272.67 T
(eate a new TDF installer?) 377.07 272.67 T
2 F
(No. As far as existing code-generator technologies are concerned TDF is) 108 243.67 T
(just another language - hence existing techniques can be used to implement) 108 227.67 T
(a TDF installer) 108 211.67 T
(. The only reason to use DRA) 191.95 211.67 T
(\325) 357.12 211.67 T
(s technology is economic - is it) 361.01 211.67 T
(cheaper to use our technology than some other?) 108 195.67 T
FMENDPAGE
%%EndPage: "16" 17
%%Page: "17" 17
612 792 0 FMBEGINPAGE
108 45 414 61.12 R
7 X
0 K
V
0 10 Q
0 X
(Questions and Answers) 108 54.45 T
108 726.98 540 742.18 R
7 X
V
0 8 Q
0 X
(ANDF and End Users) 108 736.84 T
432 45 540 61.12 R
7 X
V
0 10 Q
0 X
(17 of 23) 506.69 54.45 T
108 756 540 756 2 L
7 X
V
0.25 H
2 Z
0 X
N
108 81 540 81 2 L
7 X
V
0 X
N
108 90 540 720 R
7 X
V
108 700.98 540 704 C
90 702.49 558 702.49 2 L
0.25 H
2 Z
0 X
0 K
N
0 0 612 792 C
3 16 Q
0 X
0 K
(5. ANDF and End Users) 108 709.33 T
0 14 Q
(5.1 How much will it cost?) 108 653.64 T
2 F
(The pricing of TDF is a matter for the commercial or) 108 624.64 T
(ganizations which) 404.64 624.64 T
(license the technology from DRA.) 108 608.64 T
0 F
( 5.2 Does ANDF help me with the pr) 108 556.64 T
(oblem of legacy systems?) 323.44 556.64 T
2 F
(ANDF is not a \322magic bullet\323. It does not mandate portability) 108 527.64 T
(. This means) 453.37 527.64 T
(that ANDF is not a magical solution to the problems of legacy software.) 108 511.64 T
(Y) 108 495.64 T
(ou cannot just run a non-portable application through the ANDF) 116.7 495.64 T
-0.01 (technology and expect to produce a portable ANDF version. The advantages) 108 479.64 P
(of using ANDF are obtained by re-casting the software into shrink-wrapped) 108 463.64 T
(form.) 108 447.64 T
(Much legacy software is written in legacy programming languages) 108 419.64 T
(\050languages that are no longer popular and hence dif) 108 403.64 T
(\336cult to obtain compilers) 395.29 403.64 T
(for\051. ANDF provides a means of implementing a portable compiler for a) 108 387.64 T
(legacy language which will generate code to run on all the computers that) 108 371.64 T
(have ANDF installers \050within the limits of the portability of the application) 108 355.64 T
(being compiled\051. For some legacy languages it may be an economic) 108 339.64 T
(proposition to produce an ANDF producer) 108 323.64 T
(. This may lead to increased) 345.45 323.64 T
(longevity for some legacy languages.) 108 307.64 T
108 247.95 540 250.98 C
90 249.47 558 249.47 2 L
0.25 H
2 Z
0 X
0 K
N
0 0 612 792 C
3 16 Q
0 X
0 K
(6. T) 108 256.31 T
(echnical questions) 132.29 256.31 T
0 14 Q
(6.1 Is ANDF tied to UNIX?) 108 200.62 T
2 F
(ANDF itself is independent of operating system and will help create and) 108 171.62 T
(distribute shrink-wrapped software for any well de\336ned API. OSF\325) 108 155.62 T
(s) 482.24 155.62 T
(motivation in creating the ANDF concept was to turn the UNIX software) 108 139.62 T
(market which is currently heterogeneous with respect to processor) 108 123.62 T
(architecture into a homogeneous ANDF market. USL) 108 107.62 T
(\325) 406.33 107.62 T
(s interest is to create a) 410.22 107.62 T
FMENDPAGE
%%EndPage: "17" 18
%%Page: "18" 18
612 792 0 FMBEGINPAGE
108 45 414 61.12 R
7 X
0 K
V
0 10 Q
0 X
(Questions and Answers) 108 54.45 T
108 726.98 540 742.18 R
7 X
V
0 8 Q
0 X
(T) 108 736.84 T
(echnical questions) 112.6 736.84 T
432 45 540 61.12 R
7 X
V
0 10 Q
0 X
(18 of 23) 506.69 54.45 T
108 756 540 756 2 L
7 X
V
0.25 H
2 Z
0 X
N
108 81 540 81 2 L
7 X
V
0 X
N
108 90 540 720 R
7 X
V
2 14 Q
0 X
(homogeneous software market for UNIX SVR4.2. As a result the majority) 108 710.67 T
(of DRA) 108 694.67 T
(\325) 151.14 694.67 T
(s implementations of TDF software are for UNIX based machines.) 155.03 694.67 T
(The TDF software has also been ported to MSDOS \050with DOS extender\051) 108 678.67 T
(which supports the ANSI C library) 108 662.67 T
(, and a port to OpenVMS has also been) 302.58 662.67 T
(started.) 108 646.67 T
0 F
( 6.2 How does ANDF r) 108 594.67 T
(elate to APIs?) 242.21 594.67 T
2 F
(APIs are extremely relevant to the ANDF scenario for application) 108 565.67 T
(development, porting and distribution. T) 108 549.67 T
(o distribute an application to many) 334 549.67 T
(machines using ANDF requires the use of suitable portability guidelines.) 108 533.67 T
(ANDF has features designed to allow the representation of the interfaces) 108 517.67 T
(required for portability) 108 501.67 T
(. These might be established APIs such as Posix,) 235.33 501.67 T
(XPG3, SVID3, the AES etc. or they might be interfaces created by an ISV) 108 485.67 T
(.) 522.77 485.67 T
(TDF contains a notion called \322tokenisation\323. This is the ability of TDF to) 108 457.67 T
(represent program as a TDF tree any part of which can be represented by a) 108 441.67 T
(symbol called a \322token\323. The token can represent any part of the program) 108 425.67 T
(detail \050e.g. a type, a part of a type, a procedure, a macro, an expression or) 108 409.67 T
(part of an expression, etc.\051 which is architecture speci\336c. After distribution) 108 393.67 T
(the token can have an appropriate architecture speci\336c piece of TDF tree) 108 377.67 T
(supplied as its de\336nition. This provides a natural mechanism whereby the) 108 361.67 T
(architecture neutral information inherent in the API is abstracted and forms) 108 345.67 T
(the portability interface to the application.) 108 329.67 T
(Once an application has been shrink wrapped in ANDF it can run) 108 301.67 T
(unchanged on any computer that correctly implements the portability) 108 285.67 T
(interface that the application is designed to use. This means that API) 108 269.67 T
(conformance is of critical importance. Shrink wrapped applications will) 108 253.67 T
(provide practical tests of API conformance. The applications that have been) 108 237.67 T
(shrink-wrapped have already shown up a number of subtle errors in some) 108 221.67 T
(existing implementations of APIs.) 108 205.67 T
0 F
( 6.3 How does ANDF r) 108 153.67 T
(elate to ABIs?) 242.21 153.67 T
2 F
(ABIs de\336ne a machine level tar) 108 124.67 T
(get for compilers to ensure software) 284.55 124.67 T
(compatibility for a single processor family) 108 108.67 T
(. ANDF de\336nes a machine-) 345.32 108.67 T
FMENDPAGE
%%EndPage: "18" 19
%%Page: "19" 19
612 792 0 FMBEGINPAGE
108 45 414 61.12 R
7 X
0 K
V
0 10 Q
0 X
(Questions and Answers) 108 54.45 T
108 726.98 540 742.18 R
7 X
V
0 8 Q
0 X
(T) 108 736.84 T
(echnical questions) 112.6 736.84 T
432 45 540 61.12 R
7 X
V
0 10 Q
0 X
(19 of 23) 506.69 54.45 T
108 756 540 756 2 L
7 X
V
0.25 H
2 Z
0 X
N
108 81 540 81 2 L
7 X
V
0 X
N
108 90 540 720 R
7 X
V
2 14 Q
0 X
(independent tar) 108 710.67 T
(get for compilers to ensure software portability across all) 194.4 710.67 T
(systems that implement ANDF and have the interfaces \050e.g. GUI\051 assumed) 108 694.67 T
(by the program. An ABI is a binary compatibility interface, whereas ANDF) 108 678.67 T
(provides compatibility at the functional API level - this means that an ABI) 108 662.67 T
(speci\336cation must remain unchanged if existing ABI applications are still to) 108 646.67 T
(work, whereas in ANDF if the API functionality is maintained then ANDF) 108 630.67 T
(applications will still install properly) 108 614.67 T
(.) 313.1 614.67 T
(ANDF installers can use ABIs so that only one installer is needed for all) 108 586.67 T
(processors that implement that ABI - hence ef) 108 570.67 T
(forts to develop ABIs will) 365.39 570.67 T
(continue even after the use of ANDF becomes widespread. In the future) 108 554.67 T
(ANDF could remove the need for ISVs to be aware of the details dif) 108 538.67 T
(ferent) 490.51 538.67 T
(ABIs. This would allow much easier introduction of new processor features,) 108 522.67 T
(such as superscaling, because the need to preserve upwards compatibility in) 108 506.67 T
(the ABI would no longer exist.) 108 490.67 T
0 F
( 6.4 How does ANDF r) 108 438.67 T
(elate to distribution of multiple binaries on CD-) 242.21 438.67 T
(ROM?) 108 421.67 T
2 F
(ANDF is an advanced porting tool as well as a distribution format. The use) 108 392.67 T
(of multiple binaries on a CD-ROM may reduce the packaging and) 108 376.67 T
(distribution costs for ISVs but has no impact on portability or testing) 108 360.67 T
-0.01 (problems. For each new architecture supported, a new CD-ROM needs to be) 108 344.67 P
(issued - an application distributed in ANDF can be installed on any machine) 108 328.67 T
(with an installer) 108 312.67 T
(.) 197.4 312.67 T
(W) 108 284.67 T
(e expect that ANDF will co-exist with binary distribution and that CD-) 120.09 284.67 T
(ROMs may be used to distribute binaries of the most popular shrink-) 108 268.67 T
(wrapped applications to avoid the overhead of longer installation times.) 108 252.67 T
0 F
( 6.5 How does ANDF r) 108 200.67 T
(elate to using shr) 242.21 200.67 T
(ouded C for distribution?) 343.41 200.67 T
2 F
(Shrouded C is just a distribution mechanism - it has none of the other) 108 171.67 T
(properties of ANDF to aid in the creation of shrink-wrapped software, or) 108 155.67 T
(the description of portability interfaces.) 108 139.67 T
(Comparing Shrouded C and ANDF purely on the basis of distribution) 108 111.67 T
(formats:) 108 95.67 T
FMENDPAGE
%%EndPage: "19" 20
%%Page: "20" 20
612 792 0 FMBEGINPAGE
108 45 414 61.12 R
7 X
0 K
V
0 10 Q
0 X
(Questions and Answers) 108 54.45 T
108 726.98 540 742.18 R
7 X
V
0 8 Q
0 X
(T) 108 736.84 T
(echnical questions) 112.6 736.84 T
432 45 540 61.12 R
7 X
V
0 10 Q
0 X
(20 of 23) 506.69 54.45 T
108 756 540 756 2 L
7 X
V
0.25 H
2 Z
0 X
N
108 81 540 81 2 L
7 X
V
0 X
N
108 90 540 720 R
7 X
V
5 12 Q
0 X
(\245) 108 712 T
(Shrouded C gives only limited support to users of other programming) 121.54 712 T
(languages \050compilers to C from other languages are often far from optimal\051.) 121.54 698 T
(TDF was designed as a multi-lingual ANDF so should be much better) 121.54 684 T
(.) 488.14 684 T
(\245) 108 658 T
(Shrouded C requires a user site to have a full Software Developers Kit, whilst) 121.54 658 T
(the ANDF installation environment is likely to be bundled at no extra charge.) 121.54 644 T
(\245) 108 618 T
(installer availability for Shrouded C is no problem) 121.54 618 T
(\245) 108 592 T
(protection of proprietary information is similar) 121.54 592 T
(\245) 108 566 T
(size of distributed applications is similar) 121.54 566 T
(\245) 108 540 T
(installation times favor ANDF) 121.54 540 T
(\245) 108 514 T
(run-time performance is similar) 121.54 514 T
(\245) 108 488 T
(tools to support the installation process tend to be primitive in conventional C) 121.54 488 T
(compilers) 121.54 474 T
(\245) 108 448 T
(ANDF users get the bene\336t of using the same producer for all targets) 121.54 448 T
(\050reduced exposure to compiler incompatibilities and bugs\051) 121.54 434 T
0 14 Q
( 6.6 Is ANDF a C oriented technology?) 108 382.67 T
2 F
(At the present, the only compiler front-end for TDF is for C \050ANSI and) 108 353.67 T
(other dialects\051. A great deal of ef) 108 337.67 T
(fort has gone into ensuring that ANDF can) 292.31 337.67 T
(be used as an intermediate language in \322conventional\323 compilers for) 108 321.67 T
(languages other than C. Implementing the C front-end for TDF exposed a) 108 305.67 T
(number of issues that related to the production of architecture-neutral) 108 289.67 T
(ANDF) 108 273.67 T
(. There are parts of the semantic de\336nition of C, such as the precise) 144.97 273.67 T
(de\336nition of some integer promotions, which depend on the tar) 108 257.67 T
(get. In) 460.63 257.67 T
(addition, ANSI C was extended with a new pragma \050called \322#pragma) 108 241.67 T
(token\323\051 which allows software developers access to ANDF\325) 108 225.67 T
(s features for) 442.57 225.67 T
(describing portability interfaces. These issues have been satisfactorily) 108 209.67 T
(resolved for C, but a similar exercise would have to undertaken for other) 108 193.67 T
(languages if they are intended for use in producing shrink-wrapped) 108 177.67 T
(applications. W) 108 161.67 T
(ork is underway to write producers from several important) 194.71 161.67 T
(high-level languages.) 108 145.67 T
(See also the answer to question 6.7.) 108 117.67 T
FMENDPAGE
%%EndPage: "20" 21
%%Page: "21" 21
612 792 0 FMBEGINPAGE
108 45 414 61.12 R
7 X
0 K
V
0 10 Q
0 X
(Questions and Answers) 108 54.45 T
108 726.98 540 742.18 R
7 X
V
0 8 Q
0 X
(T) 108 736.84 T
(echnical questions) 112.6 736.84 T
432 45 540 61.12 R
7 X
V
0 10 Q
0 X
(21 of 23) 506.69 54.45 T
108 756 540 756 2 L
7 X
V
0.25 H
2 Z
0 X
N
108 81 540 81 2 L
7 X
V
0 X
N
108 90 540 720 R
7 X
V
0 14 Q
0 X
( 6.7 W) 108 710.67 T
(ill ANDF collapse as mor) 146.23 710.67 T
(e languages and targets ar) 295.22 710.67 T
(e consider) 451.2 710.67 T
(ed) 511.19 710.67 T
(\050r) 108 693.67 T
(emember UNCOL\051?) 118.62 693.67 T
2 F
(The problem with earlier attempts at a \324universal\325 compiler intermediate) 108 664.67 T
(languages \050IL\051 were they were de\336ned at the level of the tar) 108 648.67 T
(get machine) 442.29 648.67 T
(architectures. If a new architecture needed to be supported that was) 108 632.67 T
(radically dif) 108 616.67 T
(ferent from the baseline for the IL, lar) 175.75 616.67 T
(ge penalties in) 387.65 616.67 T
(performance were paid in ef) 108 600.67 T
(fectively doing the binary to binary conversion.) 265.48 600.67 T
(TDF is not a pseudo-code which represents machine instructions for some) 108 572.67 T
(abstract stack or register computer) 108 556.67 T
(. Its de\336nition is an abstraction of) 299.96 556.67 T
(programming languages not computer architectures. It is a tree-structured) 108 540.67 T
(intermediate language containing abstractions for common programming) 108 524.67 T
(language concepts such a data structures, procedures, numbers,) 108 508.67 T
(conditionals, loops, labels, jumps etc. The intention in TDF is to retain all) 108 492.67 T
(the information in the programming language being compiled to TDF which) 108 476.67 T
(can then be used by code optimizers in the installers. In this way it is) 108 460.67 T
(equally applicable to any new architecture as to any existing ones. If you) 108 444.67 T
(can ef) 108 428.67 T
(\336ciently compile C to an architecture then you can implement a TDF) 141.54 428.67 T
(installer with equal ef) 108 412.67 T
(\336ciency) 229.38 412.67 T
(.) 272.77 412.67 T
(TDF constructs have been carefully designed so as to be able to) 108 384.67 T
(accommodate the particular variants found in dif) 108 368.67 T
(ferent programming) 380.54 368.67 T
(languages. However) 108 352.67 T
(, TDF cannot guarantee coverage of new programming) 221.67 352.67 T
(languages as it can for new architectures. New languages might contain) 108 336.67 T
(novel features that are not ef) 108 320.67 T
(\336ciently implementable using existing features) 267.44 320.67 T
(of TDF) 108 304.67 T
(.) 148.47 304.67 T
(DRA have undertaken extensive research to try to ensure that TDF is an) 108 276.67 T
(ef) 108 260.67 T
(\336cient tar) 118.62 260.67 T
(get for the conventional compilation of many of today\325) 171.61 260.67 T
(s most) 478.63 260.67 T
(common languages - C++, Cobol, Fortran, Ada, Lisp, Pascal etc. and) 108 244.67 T
(several new producers are now being written. It is likely that the) 108 228.67 T
(implementation of producers for programming languages other than C will) 108 212.67 T
(expose new features that would enhance the ef) 108 196.67 T
(\336ciency of the run-time code) 368.47 196.67 T
(for these new languages - it is likely that such extensions can be added in an) 108 180.67 T
(upwards compatible manner) 108 164.67 T
(, but this cannot be guaranteed.) 265.99 164.67 T
(At the current time the only compiler front-end for TDF is for C \050ANSI and) 108 136.67 T
(other dialects\051. Implementing the C front-end for TDF exposed a number of) 108 120.67 T
(issues that related to the production of architecture-neutral ANDF) 108 104.67 T
(. There are) 475.27 104.67 T
FMENDPAGE
%%EndPage: "21" 22
%%Page: "22" 22
612 792 0 FMBEGINPAGE
108 45 414 61.12 R
7 X
0 K
V
0 10 Q
0 X
(Questions and Answers) 108 54.45 T
108 726.98 540 742.18 R
7 X
V
0 8 Q
0 X
(T) 108 736.84 T
(echnical questions) 112.6 736.84 T
432 45 540 61.12 R
7 X
V
0 10 Q
0 X
(22 of 23) 506.69 54.45 T
108 756 540 756 2 L
7 X
V
0.25 H
2 Z
0 X
N
108 81 540 81 2 L
7 X
V
0 X
N
108 90 540 720 R
7 X
V
2 14 Q
0 X
(parts of the semantic de\336nition of C, such as the precise de\336nition of some) 108 710.67 T
(integer promotions, which depend on the tar) 108 694.67 T
(get. In addition, ANSI C was) 355.3 694.67 T
(extended with the \322#pragma token\323 facility to allow software developers) 108 678.67 T
(access to TDF\325) 108 662.67 T
(s features for describing portability interfaces. These issues) 191.94 662.67 T
(have been satisfactorily resolved for C, but a similar exercise would have to) 108 646.67 T
(undertaken for other languages if they are intended for use in producing) 108 630.67 T
(shrink-wrapped applications.) 108 614.67 T
0 F
( 6.8 W) 108 562.67 T
(ill operating systems be compiled using ANDF?) 146.23 562.67 T
2 F
(TDF is a highly portable, highly optimized compiler technology and is) 108 533.67 T
(therefore very well suited to compiling or bootstrapping operating systems.) 108 517.67 T
(As TDF need not represent purely architecture neutral information, it is) 108 501.67 T
(possible for the operating system vendor to use TDF as a \324normal\325 compiler) 108 485.67 T
(and therefore avoid the need to shrink-wrap the operating system. It may) 108 469.67 T
(take a while before operating system suppliers have enough con\336dence in) 108 453.67 T
(the TDF technology to throw out their existing bootstrap compilers - until) 108 437.67 T
(then TDF will exist alongside existing native compilers.) 108 421.67 T
0 F
( 6.9 Is TDF suitable for parallel computers?) 108 369.67 T
2 F
(It depends what programming language is being used to program the) 108 340.67 T
(parallel computer) 108 324.67 T
(. If a conventional programming language is being used) 205.54 324.67 T
(\050such a C or Fortran\051 then TDF preserves enough information to allow a) 108 308.67 T
(paralysing installer to generate as ef) 108 292.67 T
(\336cient code as that produced by a) 309.42 292.67 T
(compiler direct from the language to the parallel computer) 108 276.67 T
(. TDF does not) 434.43 276.67 T
(contain any explicit parallel constructs so a parallel language \050such as high-) 108 260.67 T
(performance Fortran\051 would need to compile to TDF that has been extended) 108 244.67 T
(with tokens that represent the parallel constructs in the parallel language. If) 108 228.67 T
(a de-facto standard emer) 108 212.67 T
(ges in parallel programming languages then it) 245.67 212.67 T
(should be possible to de\336ne a standard extension to TDF to represent a) 108 196.67 T
(standard model of parallel processing.) 108 180.67 T
(There is an active research program at DRA, OSF and within Esprit that is) 108 152.67 T
(studying this topic.) 108 136.67 T
FMENDPAGE
%%EndPage: "22" 23
%%Page: "23" 23
612 792 0 FMBEGINPAGE
108 753.98 540 756 2 L
7 X
0 K
V
0.25 H
2 Z
0 X
N
108 72 540 74.02 2 L
7 X
V
0 X
N
108 46.88 324 63 R
7 X
V
0 10 Q
0 X
(Questions \050and Answers\051) 108 56.33 T
(page) 486.7 56.33 T
3 ( 23) 506.69 56.33 S
(of) 528.18 56.33 T
3 ( 23) 536.51 56.33 S
351 46.88 540 63 R
7 X
V
0 X
(23 of 23) 506.69 56.33 T
108 90 540 720 R
7 X
V
0 12 Q
0 X
(For further information please contact:) 216 648 T
(Dr) 216 616 T
(. Nic Peeling) 228.88 616 T
(internet: peeling%hermes.mod.uk@r) 216 602 T
(elay) 407.82 602 T
(.mod.uk) 427.82 602 T
(janet: peeling@uk.mod.hermes) 216 588 T
(fax: +44 684 894303) 216 574 T
FMENDPAGE
%%EndPage: "23" 24
%%Trailer
%%BoundingBox: 0 0 612 792
%%Pages: 23 1
%%DocumentFonts: Times-Bold
%%+ Symbol
%%+ Times-Roman
%%+ Times-BoldItalic
%%+ Times-Italic
%%+ Helvetica