From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 12486 invoked by alias); 8 Dec 2001 02:50:51 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 12465 invoked from network); 8 Dec 2001 02:50:50 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO nile.gnat.com) (205.232.38.5) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 8 Dec 2001 02:50:50 -0000 Received: by nile.gnat.com (Postfix, from userid 338) id 40B93F28C7; Fri, 7 Dec 2001 21:50:05 -0500 (EST) From: dewar@gnat.com To: dewar@gnat.com, kenner@vlsi1.ultra.nyu.edu, mrs@windriver.com, zack@codesourcery.com Subject: Re: ACATS legal status cleared by FSF Cc: gcc@gcc.gnu.org Message-Id: <20011208025005.40B93F28C7@nile.gnat.com> Date: Fri, 07 Dec 2001 18:57:00 -0000 X-SW-Source: 2001-12/txt/msg00410.txt.bz2 <> It is not at all a matter of "randomly changing around where messages come out all the time". Rather it is a matter of constantly improving the messages (something that would be welcome in all compilers :-) and each time such improvement occurs, it can discombobulate the baselines, and require fairly painstaking adjustments. Of course we have to do these adjustments at ACT, but the real point is that it would be a mistake to make the B tests a barrier to development. The B tests of Ada are really quite unlikely any other test suite I have seen for any other language, so I would definitely advise becoming thoroughly familiar with these tests before being too sure you know the answers. Notice the pattern here. Among those who are familiar with the ACATS B tests there is a consensus that it is not obvious that they are of value in our context. It is those who do not know the suite who are sure they must be of great value :-)