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 >