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=-1.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID
	autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 103376,2c358975e0f9f246,start
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
From: Mac Kincaid <kincaid@ivv.nasa.gov>
Subject: Ada compiler Testing Suites
Date: 1996/05/15
Message-ID: <NEWTNews.832198512.7599.mac@seta217.ivv.nasa.gov>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 155114390
organization: NASA_Software_IV&V_Facility
content-type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
mime-version: 1.0
newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Date: 1996-05-15T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>




I need some advice on whether or not an Ada compiler testing suite such as 
ACVC,  ACES or PIWG would be an appropriate tool, or if I need to use a 
different kind of Ada support tool.  I am supporting a group that is using an 
Ada compiler and have had some problems with the compiler.  The source code 
has already been written and several versions of the compiler have been tried. 
 None of which seem to be acceptable.  Several versions of this compiler have 
passed the ACVC.  Could one of these compiler testing suites be tailored in 
such a way that the most valid Ada Compiler version could be selected and the 
source code could be analyzed and changed to perform most efficiently (i.e. 
tailor the testing suite to emphasize the functionality used in the source 
code.).   It should be noted that other and newer versions of the Ada compiler 
may need to be tested in the future.

Thanks,
Mac Kincaid