Re: And speaking of fast compilers...

macrakis@osf.org (Stavros Macrakis)
Tue, 24 Nov 1992 17:37:01 GMT

          From comp.compilers

Related articles
And speaking of fast compilers... pardo@cs.washington.edu (1992-11-12)
Re: And speaking of fast compilers... sasdrf@unx.sas.com (1992-11-16)
Re: And speaking of fast compilers... preston@dawn.cs.rice.edu (1992-11-17)
Re: And speaking of fast compilers... cheryl@gallant.apple.com (1992-11-17)
Re: And speaking of fast compilers... pardo@cs.washington.edu (1992-11-17)
Re: And speaking of fast compilers... pardo@cs.washington.edu (1992-11-23)
Re: And speaking of fast compilers... macrakis@osf.org (1992-11-24)
Re: And speaking of fast compilers... preston@miranda.cs.rice.edu (1992-12-03)
| List of all articles for this month |
Newsgroups: comp.compilers
From: macrakis@osf.org (Stavros Macrakis)
Organization: OSF Research Institute
Date: Tue, 24 Nov 1992 17:37:01 GMT
Keywords: design, testing
References: 92-11-057 92-11-137

pardo@cs.washington.edu (David Keppel) reports various speed and
correctness problems with validated Ada compilers, and concludes:


      To summarize: language design is tricky and correctness doubly so.


I suppose this was meant to be _compiler_ design?


Anyway, the point is that validation tests are just tests, typically
designed to check the more obvious places where the compiler might have
gotten the semantics wrong for various reasons (oversight, laziness, using
C semantics instead of Fortran, etc.). As with any test, they can only
show the presence, never the absence, of errors. Assuming that a
validated compiler is a useful compiler can be compared to assuming that
an appliance is useful because it is listed by Underwriters Laboratories
(UL).


-s


PS For non-USians, UL is a laboratory that checks electrical equipment
for safety.
--


Post a followup to this message

Return to the comp.compilers page.
Search the comp.compilers archives again.