Re: RATIONAL TESTMATE for ADA Testing - Any experiences to share ?

["Brian Collins" <bjcollin@hotmail.com>]

Robert,

Depends on your definition of validation.  In the Avionics wold,
compiler validation isn't such a big issue.  The big issue is
verification, not validation.  According to the FAA in numerous
volumes of references,which I shall not name here for the sake
of the groups sleeping habits, verification is very important.  In
any given piece of equipment in an aircraft, every module and
line of software needs to be verified both functionally and even
structurally.  This has to include all software in a piece of equipment
like a compiler Run-Time System (RTS) and any user written
control software as well.  Having a validated compiler, as I think
you mean the word, is important to say that functionally the compiler
will produce the correct code, but that is only a very minor step.  I am
not familiar with the product you named CSMART, but if it is ever
used in an avionics box then it has been verified both functionally
and structurally.  So in essence you have to have validated products.
All depends on your definition of the terms of course.

Brian Collins
brian.collins@www.mebbs.com
bjcollin@collins.rockwell.com
http://www.math.swt.edu/~rambo




Robert Dewar wrote in message <7ia9uj$30r$1@nnrp1.deja.com>...
>In article <7i9du6$1a2$1@lure.pipex.net>,
>  "David Akister" <wellgate@dial.pipex.com> wrote:
>
>> With the need for
>> validated compilers for safety-critical use this does make
>> life difficult.
>
>I find this a bit worrying for two reasons.
>
>1) I worry that people read more into validation than is
>appropriate. Validation is useful as one of many tests for
>compiler quality, but that is all.
>
>2) Safety critical applications are quite likely to be using
>an Ada subset like CSMART, which cannot possibly be validated
>in any case.
>
>If the requirement for using a base compiler technology that
>is validated is just one of many requirements, then that is
>fine, but I have several times run into people who seem to
>think that this is
>
>a) a vital requirement (it is not)
>
>b) some kind of assurance of safety (it is not)
>
>With regard to Ada testing, a lot depends on what you are trying
>to achieve. Certainly you should be able to find coverage tools
>on the actual target you are running on, and there are also a
>number of test generation tools that are applicable to many
>different target environments.
>
>Robert Dewar
>Ada Core Technologies
>
>
>--== Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/ ==--
>---Share what you know. Learn what you don't.---