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=1.1 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_40,INVALID_DATE,
	MSGID_SHORT autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site petsd.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxr!mhuxt!houxm!vax135!petsd!cjh
From: cjh@petsd.UUCP (Chris Henrich)
Newsgroups: net.lang.ada
Subject: Re: Ada certification cost.
Message-ID: <473@petsd.UUCP>
Date: Wed, 20-Mar-85 13:24:10 EST
Article-I.D.: petsd.473
Posted: Wed Mar 20 13:24:10 1985
Date-Received: Thu, 21-Mar-85 03:37:39 EST
References: <313@calgary.UUCP>
Organization: Perkin-Elmer DSG, Tinton Falls, N.J.
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

[]
	As I understand things, to "certify" a compiler is to
state "we think we have a valid compiler."  It can be done by
the people producing the compiler, and does not require action
by AJPO.  (Prudent people will not claim to "certify" before
they are pretty sure they *can* validate.)  To "validate" a
compiler is to subject it to a large number of test programs,
under the supervision of someone from the AJPO validation
office, who is to make sure that the system for which
validation is being claimed re{lly is the one that compiled
and ran the test programs, etc. etc.  Validation is a big,
expensive operation.

Regards,
Chris

--
Full-Name:  Christopher J. Henrich
UUCP:       ..!(cornell | ariel | ukc | houxz)!vax135!petsd!cjh
US Mail:    MS 313; Perkin-Elmer; 106 Apple St; Tinton Falls, NJ 07724
Phone:      (201) 870-5853