From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.8 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_DATE
	autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
Path: utzoo!attcan!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!wuarchive!uunet!zephyr.ens.tek.com!uw-beaver!uw-june!pattis
From: pattis@cs.washington.edu (Richard Pattis)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: AdaZ Validation?
Summary: Product or Compiler
Message-ID: <14229@june.cs.washington.edu>
Date: 21 Dec 90 19:31:58 GMT
References: <9012201150.AA05505@NSWC-WO.ARPA>
Organization: U of Washington, Computer Science, Seattle
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

In article <9012201150.AA05505@NSWC-WO.ARPA>, wdence@NSWC-WO.NAVY.MIL (Walter Dence) writes:
> 
>      AdaZ does not appear on the Nov90 or Dec90 validation lists.  In
> addition it does not appear as being in line to be validated.  I for
> one am extremely unhappy about unvalidated Ada compilers.  Why have
> Ada if there is no discipline?

AdaZ is a product that uses the standard Meridian compiler, so I'm nor sure
if AdaZ (the product) must be validated independently of the compiler it
uses.  Am I missing something?

Rich Pattis