TEAM-ADA Archives

Team Ada: Ada Programming Language Advocacy

TEAM-ADA@LISTSERV.ACM.ORG

Options: Use Classic View

Use Proportional Font
Show Text Part by Default
Condense Mail Headers

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

Print Reply
Content-Type: text/plain
Sender: "Team Ada: Ada Advocacy Issues (83 & 95)" <[log in to unmask]>
From: "Brashear, Phil" <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Wed, 19 May 1999 06:55:03 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-To: Samuel Mize <[log in to unmask]>
Reply-To: "Brashear, Phil" <[log in to unmask]>
Parts/Attachments: text/plain (39 lines)
        Samuel (Mize) said:

        " If the engineering processes and testing strategies are strong
enough to
> provide confidence in the face of typos, mental bobbles and occasional
> bad decisions, they are certainly strong enough to provide confidence
> while using a less-than-validated compiler.  Indeed, any weapon system
> developed with C or Jovial must have been able to do so."
>
        Actually, JOVIAL (J73) compilers were validated by the Language
Control
        Facility at Wright-Patterson Air Force Base.  There was a very
specific Air
        Force requirement that only validated JOVIAL compilers were to be
used.
        As a matter of fact, the JOVIAL Compiler Validation System (JCVS)
still
        exists, and my organization will test JOVIAL compilers if anyone
wishes.

        To a lesser extent, C compilers were validated by the National
Institute
        of Standards and Technology until a year or so ago.  Such vendors as
        DEC and IBM (primarily those doing business with the Government)
        had validated C compilers.  Again, my organization offers validation
        services for C compilers (as well as C++ compilers) if anyone is
        interested.

Phil Brashear
EDS Conformance Testing Center
4646 Needmore Road, Bin 46
P.O. Box 24593
Dayton, OH  45424-0593
(937) 237-4510
[log in to unmask]
www.eds-conform.com

>

ATOM RSS1 RSS2