Re: Ada Core Technologies and Ada95 Standards

[l117593@cliffy.lfwc.lockheed.com (Cordes MJ)]

Robert I. Eachus posted a fine example of a case where testing the
compiler is difficult (if not harmful).

Robert Dewar has responded to Ken Garlington's posts indicating that
it is foolish to expect the ACVCs to guatantee an Ada compiler meets
the RM.

I don't think that Ken, or anybody else in the user community, expects
the ACVC to guarantee 100% compliance with the RM. I did, however, believe 
that the ACVC provided *some* measure of quality. You two can concentrate
on the pathological cases and make a strong argument for doing nothing
while we continue to develop safety critical code with *validated*
compilers which generate bad code for some of the more simple Ada 
features.

Instead of flaming us for expecting to much, take our comments and 
feedback from your "larger" user community, and challenge yourself
(i.e., the Ada compiler vendors) to provide a high quality
product that meets all of our needs.

And to the nattering nabobs of negativism I say: the users are
learning that higher quality toolsets mean lower development
costs - quality will make a difference in future toolset selections.

(this sounds much more snooty than I intended - however, it does state
my point in the fewest words :-)
--
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Michael J Cordes
Phone: (817) 935-3823
Fax:   (817) 935-3800
EMail: CordesMJ@lfwc.lockheed.com
---------------------------------------------------------------------