Strange story with Ada validation

Strange story with Ada validation

[Hibou57 (Yannick Duchêne)]

Hello,

A bit randomly, I've landed on document talking about an “ AJPO end of
mission ”.
http://sw-eng.falls-church.va.us/ajpofaq.html#mirror

and particularly on a quote :
<<
Q. What about compiler validation? Wasn't this one of AJPO's main
responsibilities?
A. Yes, as required by DoDD 3405.1 (1987). But this directive was
rescinded on April 29, 1997, and DoD's requirement for AJPO-validated
compilers was never reinstated, as AJPO had anticipated. The ACVC is
freely available for any interested party to use as they see fit, but
the official DoD Ada validation procedures and requirements no longer
exist.
>>

There is a link in the HTML version of the latter quote (about the
rescinded directive), pointing to
http://sw-eng.falls-church.va.us/oasd497.html
but which is just talking about the end of the requirement from the
DoD to use Ada for all software projects (this does not talk about
validation at all).

I had always though the AJPO was responsible of Ada compilers
validation and certifications. It seems I was driven into error by
historical documents I was believing to be up to date (from place to
place, I use to see the web site of this and this compiler vendor
proudly announcing the AJPO had validated its product).

Is still Ada a trademark of the DoD ?
Is still the validation a formal requirement ?
If yes (I suppose it is, while I may be wrong after all), who his
requesting it ?

Sorry if these ever seems to be clumsy idiot questions

Re: Strange story with Ada validation

[Randy Brukardt]

[-- Warning: decoded text below may be mangled, UTF-8 assumed --]
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1262 bytes --]

"Hibou57 (Yannick Duch�ne)" <yannick_duchene@yahoo.fr> wrote in message 
news:4683c5b7-29ef-4cac-a69b-e7d14a69f40d@j31g2000yqa.googlegroups.com...
>Hello,
>
>A bit randomly, I've landed on document talking about an � AJPO end of 
>mission �.
>http://sw-eng.falls-church.va.us/ajpofaq.html#mirror
>
...
>I had always though the AJPO was responsible of Ada compilers
>validation and certifications. It seems I was driven into error by
>historical documents I was believing to be up to date (from place to
>place, I use to see the web site of this and this compiler vendor
>proudly announcing the AJPO had validated its product).

The ARA took over responsiblity for validations (now called "conformity 
assessment") following an ISO standardized process when AJPO was closed. See 
http://www.adaic.com/compilers/testing.html for some information and 
articles on the process. But note that no one is formally doing these any 
more; the major value of the process is the existence of the test suite and 
the fact that compilers follow it. Since vendors all follow the ACATS 
without formal testing, there hasn't been too much demand for the extra 
costs involved with the formal testing.

                             Randy Brukardy, ACAA Technical Agent

Re: Strange story with Ada validation

[Hibou57 (Yannick Duchêne)]

On 9 fév, 01:54, "Randy Brukardt" <ra...@rrsoftware.com> wrote:
> The ARA took over responsiblity for validations (now called "conformity
> assessment") following an ISO standardized process when AJPO was closed.
> Seeh ttp://www.adaic.com/compilers/testing.htmlfor some information and
> articles on the process.
I had a look at AdaIC, but missed this one page.

> But note that no one is formally doing these any
> more; the major value of the process is the existence of the test suite and
> the fact that compilers follow it.
Yes, I was indeed wondering about it. There was this article, and the
words about required ACATS updates coming with some Ada 2005 Issues.
This was looking strange to me : an article stating there was no
validation next to Ada 95, and the ACATS seeming in very good health
and applying to Ada 2005.

> Since vendors all follow the ACATS
> without formal testing, there hasn't been too much demand for the extra
> costs involved with the formal testing.
This can be pointed as a good point indeed.

So this is mainly a matter of trust after all (if I've correctly
understood every thing).

By the way, as the ACATS tests suite is publicly available, any one
can check a compiler him/her-self if he/she ever wanted to do so
(while driving alone thousands of tests if probably not a kind of
holiday time).

I guess having a single and common instance taking over this
responsibility, is mainly a matter of funding.

Thanks for the lighting (to be honest, I was expecting a reply from
you).

Although informal, this is still there and in good place (I feel at
rest now).

Re: Strange story with Ada validation

[Randy Brukardt]

[-- Warning: decoded text below may be mangled, UTF-8 assumed --]
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1100 bytes --]

"Hibou57 (Yannick Duch�ne)" <yannick_duchene@yahoo.fr> wrote in message 
news:f7a8df87-84c4-474d-86e9-322714169b2a@u9g2000yqb.googlegroups.com...
>On 9 f�v, 01:54, "Randy Brukardt" <ra...@rrsoftware.com> wrote:
...
>> But note that no one is formally doing these any
>> more; the major value of the process is the existence of the test suite 
>> and
>> the fact that compilers follow it.
>Yes, I was indeed wondering about it. There was this article, and the
>words about required ACATS updates coming with some Ada 2005 Issues.
>This was looking strange to me : an article stating there was no
>validation next to Ada 95, and the ACATS seeming in very good health
>and applying to Ada 2005.

Probably that is best summed up as "you can't believe everything you read on 
the Internet"! I suspect that you can find someone claiming that the earth 
is flat if you look long enough. :-)

There was at one point a page somewhere on the net that claimed "Ada is 
Dead!". That was something like 10 years ago now, so I think it was somewhat 
premature. :-)

                                 Randy.

Re: Strange story with Ada validation

[Keith Thompson]

"Randy Brukardt" <randy@rrsoftware.com> writes:
[...]
> Probably that is best summed up as "you can't believe everything you read on 
> the Internet"! I suspect that you can find someone claiming that the earth 
> is flat if you look long enough. :-)
[...]

You don't have to look very long at all.

<http://theflatearthsociety.org/>

-- 
Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keith) kst-u@mib.org  <http://www.ghoti.net/~kst>
Nokia
"We must do something.  This is something.  Therefore, we must do this."
    -- Antony Jay and Jonathan Lynn, "Yes Minister"