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=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham
	autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Thread: 103376,43127f177a55dc41
X-Google-NewGroupId: yes
X-Google-Attributes: gida07f3367d7,domainid0,public,usenet
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
Received: by 10.68.59.229 with SMTP id c5mr5339952pbr.6.1320919010739;
        Thu, 10 Nov 2011 01:56:50 -0800 (PST)
Path: 
 h5ni21578pba.0!nntp.google.com!news1.google.com!goblin2!goblin1!goblin.stu.neva.ru!eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: =?UTF-8?B?w4FsZXggUi4=?=  Mosteo <alejandro@mosteo.com>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: limited allocated classwide types
Date: Thu, 10 Nov 2011 10:56:47 +0100
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Message-ID: <j9g751$evv$1@dont-email.me>
References: <0ed43f83-40e7-46d3-8cc4-e1c41f500d28@c1g2000vbw.googlegroups.com>
 <m21utoer3d.fsf@pushface.org>
 <e3ca4799-e6e1-42c3-a522-d04b8221979f@er6g2000vbb.googlegroups.com>
 <j90cm9$7p0$1@dont-email.me>
 <14ff4109-2f02-4dee-9638-68c1befc07c2@hc5g2000vbb.googlegroups.com>
 <j9ab04$l5r$1@munin.nbi.dk> <j9b676$7ph$1@dont-email.me>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Injection-Date: Thu, 10 Nov 2011 09:56:49 +0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: mx04.eternal-september.org;
 posting-host="U8D4Up5H9mlhgn5jKwjRxA";
	logging-data="15359"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";
	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX19pXX44h2N7s28f7t3HSJRC"
User-Agent: KNode/4.7.3
Cancel-Lock: sha1:aX9IukN9zpQeaSARNl/f7KxFv0I=
Xref: news1.google.com comp.lang.ada:18907
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit
Date: 2011-11-10T10:56:47+01:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

Brian Drummond wrote:

(...)
> 
> I absolutely agree that ACATS shouldn't be a dumping ground for random
> testcases ... but, if there were such an extensible test suite, it would
> inevitably contain the occasional nugget worth polishing up and adding to
> the canon.
> 
> Perhaps a starting point is to GPL any testcases we submit against (FSF
> or GPL) Gnat, so that they can become part of the public record. (I
> understand that commercial bug reports against commercial compilers will
> be treated differently!)

I have read somewhere that AdaCore keeps a repository of testcases for every 
bug ever corrected. These are tested against new compiler versions to avoid 
any regression. This is very appealing to me, and it would be nice to have 
something similar for the GPL versions.

Of course this does not aid in testing new features, but as long as there is 
some interaction between new and old features, it could detect some 
problems. Besides the obvious help in checking the sanity of compiler 
releases going into public distributions.

> 
> The second question :
> (2) when adding a new feature or language revision, is there a systematic
> effort to add tests for it?
> I think has been answered by the remarks on funding...
> 
> Thanks,
> - Brian