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: 103376,42427d0d1bf647b1
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
From: dewar@cs.nyu.edu (Robert Dewar)
Subject: Re: Ada Core Technologies and Ada95 Standards
Date: 1996/04/24
Message-ID: <dewar.830399989@schonberg>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 151307923
references: <00001a73+00002c20@msn.com> <dewar.827809782@schonberg>
 <828038680.5631@assen.demon.co.uk> <dewar.828062076@schonberg>
 <828127251.85@assen.demon.co.uk> <dewar.828157508@schonberg>
 <315FD5C9.342F@lfwc.lockheed.com> <dewar.828415807@schonberg>
 <3160EFBF.BF9@lfwc.lockheed.com> <dewar.829186739@schonberg>
 <dewar.829192619@schonberg> <829851188.11037@assen.demon.co.uk>
 <dewar.829886843@schonberg> <830205883.24190@assen.demon.co.uk>
 <317CB1C1.431F@lmtas.lmco.com> <830369569.19364@assen.demon.co.uk>
organization: Courant Institute of Mathematical Sciences
newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Date: 1996-04-24T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

John McCabe said

"I'm loathe to believe that any of the ACVC tests are truly useless
(although I have to admit I haven't looked at them so far), but in a
general case, where the particular test mentioned was _truly_ useless,
then I would choose the performance improvement."

I really think that if you want to express opinions on the ACVC suite,
new or old, you might find it quite helpful to look at the tests!

I suspect that Ken has not looked at them either. Ken, you keep asking
about how the ACVC process is being improved? Why not look?