Newsgroups: comp.arch
Path: utzoo!henry
From: henry@utzoo.uucp (Henry Spencer)
Subject: Re: Unaligned data and old FORTRAN
Message-ID: <1989Apr8.235708.3335@utzoo.uucp>
Organization: U of Toronto Zoology
References: <13998@sequent.UUCP> <98036@sun.Eng.Sun.COM>
Date: Sat, 8 Apr 89 23:57:08 GMT

In article <98036@sun.Eng.Sun.COM> khb@sun.UUCP (fatcity) writes:
>There is no x3j3 equivalent of Ada validation. There are suites which
>purport to validate a compiler, but they have no x3j3, ansi, or iso
>standing. 

One reason for this, incidentally, is that standards committees have to
tread lightly to avoid problems with anti-trust laws.  Saying that one
manufacturer's compiler conforms and another doesn't leaves the committee
open to charges of bias, especially if the non-conforming compiler comes
from an outfit that was not represented on the committee.

The US government is another story, which is why Ada validation exists.
There are also government validation suites for COBOL, and I think for
FORTRAN.  They don't have the same magic status ("*the* validation suite
for the language"), since the government does not set the standards for
said languages.
-- 
Welcome to Mars!  Your         |     Henry Spencer at U of Toronto Zoology
passport and visa, comrade?    | uunet!attcan!utzoo!henry henry@zoo.toronto.edu