TEAM-ADA Archives

Team Ada: Ada Programming Language Advocacy

TEAM-ADA@LISTSERV.ACM.ORG

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
David Weller <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
David Weller <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Wed, 11 Jun 1997 07:58:37 -0500
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (32 lines)
> Is there a requirement that compilers for these two languages be
> validated? If so, who validates the C compilers? It's my understanding
> that NIST is going out of the compiler validation business. Surely you
> don't require that Ada compilers be validated while allowing unvalidated
> C compilers?
>

IMNSHO, validation was important to a VERY small subset of
developers/projects/program managers. Many, many people have
overestimated the value of validation as a "motivator". What we did
is create this type of logic (argue all you want, I've seen it
hundreds of times personally):

        if language = C then
                if vendor claims it complies with ANSI standard then
                        the compiler is good
                else
                        it's probably even better with those extensions
                end if
                C is a good choice since everybody knows it
        end if


        if language = Ada then
                if compiler is unvalidated then
                        the compiler is very bad
                else
                        compiler is very expensive
                end if
                don't use Ada
        end if

ATOM RSS1 RSS2