* Re: Do you have Standards Committee in your language? [not found] <3B0AF1F6.BDE29DF3@my-deja.net> @ 2001-05-23 22:02 ` Florian Weimer 2001-05-24 17:35 ` Marc A. Criley 2001-05-24 20:19 ` Tucker Taft 2001-05-24 15:17 ` Marin David Condic 1 sibling, 2 replies; 5+ messages in thread From: Florian Weimer @ 2001-05-23 22:02 UTC (permalink / raw) Just_Curious <Just_Curious@my-deja.net> writes: > What is the role of Your Language committee? AFAIK, there is no Language committee. The Ada Rapporteur Group (ARG) is probably an institution which comes close (at least in function). It handles defect reports for the ISO Ada standard and examines future directions of the language (for the next revision of the standard, see http://www.ada-auth.org/). > Does Your Committees expand horizons and enlightens compiler > developers with their recommendations? The compiler developers participate, of course. After all, they're quite familiar with the language, so their input is appreciated. > Do you think that compiler vendors and users themselves are not > able to maintain backward compatibility without such committees? Wearing my Ada hat, I do not understand this question. However, if I put it off and try my C hat, I can understand what you mean. :-/ Ada vendors usually don't derivate from the language standard in any significant way, that's why we have the standard. ;-) Some vendors provide additional features, of course, some of them are even comparable and compatible, but these extensions don't play a major role, unlike the 'extensions' over the standard many C implementations provide (mainly adherence to mostly unwritten conventions). In contrast to many other popular programming languages, there is a publicly available test suite for Ada implementations, and compiler vendors seek independent validation of their products against this test suite because it's quite difficult to sell a compiler which hasn't been validated on at least some platforms. There's no market for proprietary Ada dialects at the moment, which is probably a good thing. > And in general, do you see some analogies between Language > Committees and other regulations in other areas of real life, on the > net etc ? IMHO, a group like the ARG is necessary if you have such a complex technical specification like a programming language standard. This is not a question of regulation, it's a technical necessity. > This is post in several language compiler newsgroups, I'm answering to an article which was just posted to comp.lang.ada. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* Re: Do you have Standards Committee in your language? 2001-05-23 22:02 ` Do you have Standards Committee in your language? Florian Weimer @ 2001-05-24 17:35 ` Marc A. Criley 2001-05-25 7:32 ` Florian Weimer 2001-05-24 20:19 ` Tucker Taft 1 sibling, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread From: Marc A. Criley @ 2001-05-24 17:35 UTC (permalink / raw) Florian Weimer wrote: > > > In contrast to many other popular programming languages, there is a > publicly available test suite for Ada implementations, and compiler > vendors seek independent validation of their products against this > test suite because it's quite difficult to sell a compiler which > hasn't been validated on at least some platforms. There's no market > for proprietary Ada dialects at the moment, which is probably a good > thing. Actually there are language test suites for other popular languages and a testing center available for performing formal certifications (http://eds-conform.com/ValProdList.html). EDS provides conformance testing for Ada, C, C++, COBOL, Fortran, and SQL. As Phil Brashear has periodically lamented, no one outside the Ada community has undertaken a language conformance assessment. Marc A. Criley Senior Staff Engineer Quadrus Corporation www.quadruscorp.com ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* Re: Do you have Standards Committee in your language? 2001-05-24 17:35 ` Marc A. Criley @ 2001-05-25 7:32 ` Florian Weimer 0 siblings, 0 replies; 5+ messages in thread From: Florian Weimer @ 2001-05-25 7:32 UTC (permalink / raw) "Marc A. Criley" <mcqada@earthlink.net> writes: > Actually there are language test suites for other popular languages and > a testing center available for performing formal certifications > (http://eds-conform.com/ValProdList.html). EDS provides conformance > testing for Ada, C, C++, COBOL, Fortran, and SQL. But popular language *implementations* have never been tested by such testing centers. ;-) (Or maybe they have been tested, but the results where too embarrassing to be published.) ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* Re: Do you have Standards Committee in your language? 2001-05-23 22:02 ` Do you have Standards Committee in your language? Florian Weimer 2001-05-24 17:35 ` Marc A. Criley @ 2001-05-24 20:19 ` Tucker Taft 1 sibling, 0 replies; 5+ messages in thread From: Tucker Taft @ 2001-05-24 20:19 UTC (permalink / raw) Florian Weimer wrote: > > Just_Curious <Just_Curious@my-deja.net> writes: > > > What is the role of Your Language committee? > > AFAIK, there is no Language committee. The Ada Rapporteur Group (ARG) > is probably an institution which comes close (at least in function). ISO has a working group (working group 9, "WG9") devoted to the Ada language. This is the "language committee" in the official sense. The ARG is a subgroup of WG9. There are other "rapporteur" groups within WG9, for example the ASIS-RG, which work on standards related to Ada. The ARG focuses on the language standard itself. The ARG makes recommendations to WG9. WG9 is the official body which takes the official country-by-country votes on these recommendations. They are then forwarded to upper level ISO groups (JTC1, etc.) for further even-more-official action. > It handles defect reports for the ISO Ada standard and examines future > directions of the language (for the next revision of the standard, see > http://www.ada-auth.org/). > > > Does Your Committees expand horizons and enlightens compiler > > developers with their recommendations? > > The compiler developers participate, of course. After all, they're > quite familiar with the language, so their input is appreciated. All of our activities are quite open. The ada-auth site mentioned above is the best place to look for minutes, technical reports, Ada Interpretations (AIs), etc. > > > Do you think that compiler vendors and users themselves are not > > able to maintain backward compatibility without such committees? > > Wearing my Ada hat, I do not understand this question. However, if I > put it off and try my C hat, I can understand what you mean. :-/ > > Ada vendors usually don't derivate from the language standard in any > significant way, that's why we have the standard. ;-) > > Some vendors provide additional features, of course, some of them > are even comparable and compatible, but these extensions don't > play a major role, unlike the 'extensions' over the standard many > C implementations provide (mainly adherence to mostly unwritten > conventions). > > In contrast to many other popular programming languages, there is a > publicly available test suite for Ada implementations, and compiler > vendors seek independent validation of their products against this > test suite because it's quite difficult to sell a compiler which > hasn't been validated on at least some platforms. There's no market > for proprietary Ada dialects at the moment, which is probably a good > thing. I agree with all of the above. Note that there are test suites for other languages which are publically available, but the Ada test suite (officially called the "Ada Conformity Assessment Test Suite" -- ACATS) has an official status with respect to the ISO standardized Ada conformance testing process. Also, the test suite is under continuous maintenance by the ACAA (Ada Conformity Assessment Authority), to ensure that it always reflects the latest rulings of WG9. > > > And in general, do you see some analogies between Language > > Committees and other regulations in other areas of real life, on the > > net etc ? > > IMHO, a group like the ARG is necessary if you have such a complex > technical specification like a programming language standard. This is > not a question of regulation, it's a technical necessity. Although in the beginning, the Ada test suite was a royal pain for implementors, it is now clear that to achieve true standardization, a rigorous test suite that is widely available is essential. My own view is that part of the failure of Java on the client was the inadequacy and lack of easy availability of a rigorous test suite for Java (especially for the GUI/AWT libraries). Sun is still pretty stingy with their test suites, though we are at least now seeing more visibility of "J2EE certification." This seems like one of the few test suites that has achieved the level of visibility to the average users that the Ada test suite has had in the Ada community. > > > This is post in several language compiler newsgroups, > > I'm answering to an article which was just posted to comp.lang.ada. -- -Tucker Taft stt@avercom.net http://www.averstar.com/~stt/ Chief Technology Officer, AverCom Corporation (A Titan Company) Burlington, MA USA (AverCom was formerly the Commercial Division of AverStar: http://www.averstar.com/services/ebusiness_applications.html) ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* Re: Do you have Standards Committee in your language? [not found] <3B0AF1F6.BDE29DF3@my-deja.net> 2001-05-23 22:02 ` Do you have Standards Committee in your language? Florian Weimer @ 2001-05-24 15:17 ` Marin David Condic 1 sibling, 0 replies; 5+ messages in thread From: Marin David Condic @ 2001-05-24 15:17 UTC (permalink / raw) This does not appear on my newsreader to be posted to any other groups besides Comp.Lang.Ada. Were you figuring on independently checking all of the language groups for followups? Or is it a problem with my newsreader? Since Ada is one of the few OO languages out there with an ISO standard and test suite and a history of standard-adherence among compiler vendors, it would be interesting to see how other languages stack up against it. Other languages have standards, to be sure, but divergence from the standards seems to be more the rule than the exception. In this respect, Ada has done famously well - if one considers standard-adherence to be a good thing. MDC -- Marin David Condic Senior Software Engineer Pace Micro Technology Americas www.pacemicro.com Enabling the digital revolution e-Mail: marin.condic@pacemicro.com Web: http://www.mcondic.com/ "Just_Curious" <Just_Curious@my-deja.net> wrote in message news:3B0AF1F6.BDE29DF3@my-deja.net... > All, > > Thinking about role of Standards Committee in my favorite > language (Fortran) I decided to hear advice from folks in other > languages first. > > What is the role of Your Language committee? > > Does Your Committees expand horizons and enlightens compiler > developers with their recommendations? Or opposite, > not being creative, they are working like brake for language > development and experimenting and eventually are bad for > users? > > Do you think that compiler vendors and users themselves are not > able to maintain backward compatibility without such committees? > > And in general, do you see some analogies between Language Committees > and other regulations in other areas of real life, on the net etc ? > > I think these questions are of common interest. > This is post in several language compiler newsgroups, > hence please mention your language unless you specially > don't want this. You may find responds on other languages > searching Deja with subject as above. > > cheers > > > ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2001-05-25 7:32 UTC | newest] Thread overview: 5+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed) -- links below jump to the message on this page -- [not found] <3B0AF1F6.BDE29DF3@my-deja.net> 2001-05-23 22:02 ` Do you have Standards Committee in your language? Florian Weimer 2001-05-24 17:35 ` Marc A. Criley 2001-05-25 7:32 ` Florian Weimer 2001-05-24 20:19 ` Tucker Taft 2001-05-24 15:17 ` Marin David Condic
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox