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: 103376,9079fcba2f29f945 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public From: dewar@cs.nyu.edu (Robert Dewar) Subject: Re: Ada Validation Date: 1996/03/27 Message-ID: #1/1 X-Deja-AN: 144630224 references: <00001a73+00002c38@msn.com> <4jcpss$s2u@usenet.srv.cis.pitt.edu> organization: Courant Institute of Mathematical Sciences newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Date: 1996-03-27T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: Tore said "Tore said "GNAT 3.00 for SGI is validated (I'm not sure how it works, but I guess 3.04 is validated too (?)). The other ports use more or less the same code. If I've understood resent postings correctly, the reason for not validating all the ports is that a validation is expensive (I think somebody mentioned twenty grands, which is much to spend on a free compiler" Tore, you have not understood these "recent postings", indeed I have no idea what you are talking about. GNAT may be free, but of course serious use of GNAT with support is not free, and users who rquire validation are typically not casual hobbyists (who tpically do not care about validation). Ada Core Technologies is planning on validating on all major targets. We decided not to do any further validations under 2.0, and we are now working on 2.0.1 validation. Out validation schedule is not determined, and will be decided on the basis of commercial considerations and requirements. Note that the 3.04 that you pull off by anonymous FTP is not technically validated, althugh it may be from the same code base as the validated compiler. To have a compiler that meets formal validation requirements, you must have a contract with one of the certificate holders, i.e. from SGI or from Ada Core Technlogies. Robert Dewar Ada Core Technologies