From: dewar@cs.nyu.edu (Robert Dewar)
Subject: Re: The Ada Compiler Evaluation System
Date: 1996/04/24
Date: 1996-04-24T00:00:00+00:00 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <dewar.830400776@schonberg> (raw)
In-Reply-To: 317B7757.4849@lmtas.lmco.com
"OK. Given that" [t]he DoD should require of all Ada vendors only those
quality criteria which arguably apply in a cost-effective manner across the
board to all DoD users of Ada," what should be included in that criteria?
Should it be the ACVC? Should it be a different ACVC? Should it be something
in addition to the ACVC? Should it be something instead of the ACVC?"
A starting point would be to study what has already been decided in this
area by the project team and advisory committee for the new ACVC test
suite. In particular, I would take a little time to study the ACVC suite,
both old and new.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~1996-04-24 0:00 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
1996-04-17 0:00 The Ada Compiler Evaluation System Philip Brashear
1996-04-18 0:00 ` Ken Garlington
1996-04-21 0:00 ` Robert Dewar
1996-04-22 0:00 ` Ken Garlington
1996-04-24 0:00 ` Robert Dewar [this message]
1996-04-26 0:00 ` Ken Garlington
1996-04-27 0:00 ` Robert Dewar
1996-04-29 0:00 ` Laurent Guerby
replies disabled
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox