From: Zack Weinberg <zack@codesourcery.com>
To: dewar@gnat.com
Cc: kenner@vlsi1.ultra.nyu.edu, mrs@windriver.com, gcc@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: Re: ACATS legal status cleared by FSF
Date: Sun, 09 Dec 2001 13:02:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20011209205234.GP280@codesourcery.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20011208025650.7B397F28C7@nile.gnat.com>
On Fri, Dec 07, 2001 at 09:56:50PM -0500, dewar@gnat.com wrote:
> Note that just *reading* B tests to see if the output is correct is
> a very difficult task, one that only someone with quite a bit of
> ACVC/ACATS validation experience can do. A formal validation run
> using these tests often involves several days of painstaking manual
> work by someone who is an expert in the B tests to assure
> compliance.
I think this may be the crux of the difference between the B tests and
the existing "noncompile" tests for gcc and g++. We - all the people
arguing for inclusion of noncompile tests - are used to a context
where it is easy to automate verification that diagnostics are
correctly issued. When diagnostics do legitimately change, the test
harness has to be adjusted, but this is straightforward, easily done
by the person who changed the diagnostics.
You're saying that the B tests are nothing like that, and we are
finding that hard to believe. I'd like to see context - is the ACATS
validation suite available online somewhere I can go look at it?
zw
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2001-12-09 20:52 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 30+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2001-12-07 19:12 dewar
2001-12-09 13:02 ` Zack Weinberg [this message]
2001-12-09 14:52 ` guerby
2001-12-09 19:47 ` Geert Bosch
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2001-12-09 19:03 dewar
2001-12-09 15:06 dewar
2001-12-09 15:55 ` Joseph S. Myers
2001-12-09 14:00 dewar
2001-12-07 18:57 dewar
2001-12-07 18:50 mike stump
2001-12-07 17:59 dewar
2001-12-07 3:18 Richard Kenner
2001-12-06 19:09 dewar
2001-12-06 17:38 dewar
2001-12-06 15:40 Richard Kenner
2001-12-06 15:01 Richard Kenner
2001-12-05 23:36 dewar
2001-12-05 15:28 Richard Kenner
2001-12-05 15:41 ` guerby
2001-12-05 15:13 guerby
2001-12-05 16:21 ` Joseph S. Myers
2001-12-05 18:00 ` Jerry van Dijk
2001-12-06 3:36 ` Geoff Keating
2001-12-06 9:34 ` Geert Bosch
2001-12-06 11:48 ` Zack Weinberg
2001-12-06 14:24 ` Geert Bosch
2001-12-06 14:32 ` Joseph S. Myers
2001-12-06 15:10 ` Zack Weinberg
2001-12-06 15:41 ` Geert Bosch
2001-12-06 18:22 ` Zack Weinberg
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20011209205234.GP280@codesourcery.com \
--to=zack@codesourcery.com \
--cc=dewar@gnat.com \
--cc=gcc@gcc.gnu.org \
--cc=kenner@vlsi1.ultra.nyu.edu \
--cc=mrs@windriver.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).