From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.5-pre1 (2020-06-20) on
	ip-172-31-74-118.ec2.internal
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.0 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_20 autolearn=ham
	autolearn_force=no version=3.4.5-pre1
Date: 1 Jul 93 17:48:46 GMT
From: vnet.IBM.COM@uunet.uu.net
Subject: Re: lint tool for Ada?
Message-ID: <19930701.105001.319@almaden.ibm.com>
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

>How about it compiler vendors? The only third-party tool that responded needed
 POSIX
>and ASIS compliance. Either the compilers need to go this route so that third-
party
>software can make Ada programmers lives less miserable, or provide toolsets th
at
>actually provided the functionality we need.

There was a panel discussion on tools like this at WADAS yesterday.  I
gather that for any meaningful analysis of the code ASIS is needed (or
it will have to be compiler specific) because you need to get at the
sublib to determine things like unused withs etc.  Ada Assured was
another interesting tool that does some of this kind of thing.  Mostly
based around a language sensitive editor.  It probably also requires
ASIS but I don't know about POSIX.

There were five guys on this panel each from a different company.
Ada Mat, Ada Assured, AQT (which is not a commercial product),
a company called Little Tree (don't remember the product name).
I forget the last.  Apparently there is a market out there.

********************************************************************
* These opinions are mine only.                     John Nestoriak *
********************************************************************