I might point out that Ada Compiler Validation never did test compiler bugs.
Many less than "defect-free"  compilers might exist that are fully
validated.    Even GANT is not without bugs ;-)

And how about the underling  operating systems, databases and other COT
products?   I have seen DOD projects which go to great lengths to use
"Safety-Critical" subsets of Ada ( Annex H) and then  run them on an
untested operating system.


Bill Dale
LMMS
mailto:[log in to unmask]
mailto:[log in to unmask]

> ----------
> From:         Roger Racine
> Reply To:     Roger Racine
> Sent:         Tuesday, May 18, 1999 13:05
> To:   [log in to unmask]
> Subject:      Conformance Testing
>
> Our company is involved in an Army project planning to use Ada.  An Army
> officer wrote a memo describing his concerns over the loss of DoD
> involvement in what used to be validation of compilers.  A very rough
> synopsis of his concerns is:
>
> *  Since the testing is now being done by a commercial group (the ARA),
> the
> testing might be less rigorous than when it was done by the AJPO, so as to
> satisfy the commercial sector, which has less need for rigor than the DoD.
> This might lead to less assurance that the compiler is defect-free, which
> then leads to the conclusion that the end system will be less reliable.
>
> We are being asked to comment on this memo, and would like any information
> regarding the Conformance Testing that might alleviate this concern.  For
> example, is ISO, or any independent organization, involved in the
> definition of the tests?
>
> Since the government dropped testing, has testing continued?
>
> Basically, I could use any ammunition on why conformance testing is either
> A) just as good as it used to be; or B) why conformance testing is not a
> major factor in end-system reliability.
>
> Pointers to web sites or technical articles would also be welcome.
>
> Roger Racine
> Roger Racine
> Draper Laboratory, MS 31
> 555 Technology Sq.
> Cambridge, MA 02139
> 617-258-2489
>