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: 103376,2afac1a4161c7f35
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
From: dewar@merv.cs.nyu.edu (Robert Dewar)
Subject: Re: who owns the code? was Re: Distinguishing type names from other
 identifiers
Date: 1998/01/20
Message-ID: <dewar.885328583@merv>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 317779307
References: <dewar.885226930@merv> <dewar.885163403@merv>
 <199801201416.PAA24822@basement.replay.com>
X-Complaints-To: usenet@news.nyu.edu
X-Trace: news.nyu.edu 885328825 2234 (None) 128.122.140.58
Organization: New York University
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Date: 1998-01-20T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>


Jeff said

<<This is an advantage to supporting a compiler; there are many
application areas where such a test suite would be difficult to create.
Presumably your customers are continually sending you candidates for
addition to this test suite.
>>

Absolutely! I commented in my message on this subject that I quite realize
this model is not easily adaptable for domains in which constructing a
comprehensive automated test suite is impractical.

Note that one of the big advantages of the public distribution model for
GNAT is that no only do our customers send us candidates for addition
to this test suite, but so do unsupported users. We get lots of bug
reports from unsupported users over the years, and whether or not they
turn out to be actual bugs or not, they have provided lots of interesting
test cases.

GNAT has been very extensively tested in this way for six years, and of
course everyone benefits from this testing, both supported and 
non-supported users.

RObert Dewar
Ada Core Technologies