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,
	MSGID_FROM_MTA_HEADER autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 126597,252c4ddda1899e4a,start
X-Google-Attributes: gid126597,public
X-Google-ArrivalTime: 1983-05-17 21:08:39 PST
Message-ID: <bnews.ogcvax.307>
Newsgroups: net.lang.ada
Path: 
 utzoo!decvax!harpo!seismo!hao!menlo70!sytek!zehntel!tektronix!ogcvax!rascal
X-Path: 
 utzoo!decvax!harpo!seismo!hao!menlo70!sytek!zehntel!tektronix!ogcvax!rascal
From: ogcvax!rascal
Date: Tue May 17 21:08:39 1983
Subject: ACVC
X-Google-Info: Converted from the original B-News header
Posted: Fri May  6 12:51:42 1983
Received: Tue May 17 21:08:39 1983
Date: 1983-05-17T21:08:39+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

ACVC stands for Ada Compiler Validation Capability.

I'm not surprised that NYU's compiler was the first to pass all ACVC
tests since (I think) SofTech used Ada/Ed to develop the ACVC tests.
However, I believe passing ACVC tests is only part of the validation
process: some extra documentation must also be provided.

I remember someone at an AdaTEC conference saying something like:

	If Ada/Ed is used to validate ACVC, and if ACVC is
	used to validate Ada/Ed, does that mean that every
	validated Ada compiler must have all the same bugs
	found in ACVC and Ada/Ed?

Of course, real validation is done through the DoD, so the race is still on!

		Steve Scalpone

		CSNET:	rascal@Oregon-Grad
		USENET:	...teklabs!ogcvax!rascal
		USENET:	...hplabs!hp-pcd!ogcvax!rascal
		ARPA:	rascal.Oregon-Grad@RAND-RELAY