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=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham
	autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Thread: 103376,9b7d3a51d0d8b6ee
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,domainid0,public,usenet
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
Path: 
 g2news1.google.com!postnews.google.com!20g2000yqt.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
From: Ludovic Brenta <ludovic@ludovic-brenta.org>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: Compiler quality (was: Extending discriminant types)
Date: Tue, 25 Nov 2008 02:01:23 -0800 (PST)
Organization: http://groups.google.com
Message-ID: <9cb27caa-8e9f-4123-ad36-4980c3032722@20g2000yqt.googlegroups.com>
References: <20081115101632.5f98c596@cube.tz.axivion.com>
 <20081122011825.5354d1c1@cube.tz.axivion.com>
	<6691d418-5ce8-4584-8a09-3eb6bbc6d17f@v13g2000yqm.googlegroups.com>
	<VQGWk.153813$Mh5.125511@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 153.98.68.197
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Trace: posting.google.com 1227607284 30212 127.0.0.1 (25 Nov 2008 10:01:24
 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com
NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 25 Nov 2008 10:01:24 +0000 (UTC)
Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com
Injection-Info: 20g2000yqt.googlegroups.com; posting-host=153.98.68.197;
	posting-account=pcLQNgkAAAD9TrXkhkIgiY6-MDtJjIlC
User-Agent: G2/1.0
X-HTTP-UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv:1.8.0.12)
	Gecko/20070718 Red Hat/1.5.0.12-3.el5 Firefox/1.5.0.12,gzip(gfe),gzip(gfe)
Xref: g2news1.google.com comp.lang.ada:2781
Date: 2008-11-25T02:01:23-08:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

On Nov 25, 12:33 am, a...@anon.org (anon) wrote:
> You also forget that Adacore has 100s may be even 1,000,000s of simple
> files they use for syntax checking for each Ada specifications.  That can
> trap all syntax type of errors. And that group of files grows yearly, if not
> daily.

Apparently you also forgot to read what I wrote earlier:

> Even an infinite amount of testing cannot prove a program to be bug-
> free; it can only uncover an infinite amount of bugs. If you want to
> prove a program correct, you must use formal methods, not testing.

The rest of your rantings are only a consequence of this basic
misunderstanding of yours.

--
Ludovic Brenta.