On Sun, Feb 10, 2008 at 05:20:19PM -0800, SJS wrote:
begin quoting Darren New as of Sun, Feb 10, 2008 at 04:16:21PM -0800:
SJS wrote:
>You could use the hit squad to keep folks who don't implement compliant
>systems from claiming that it is compliant (or from implying that the
>non-compliant version implements the language as defined).
Yeah, that worked wonders for Ada acceptance. :-)
Ada had public / published compliance tests?
Um, yes. I thought it was kind of famous for that.
Current versions are at: <http://www.adaic.org/compilers/testing.html>
Until 1987, a compiler couldn't use the "Ada" trademark without passing the
suite. This has been relaxed, and passing the suite is only required for
certification.
However, even for Ada, it's never had any more force that trademark law.
Call you compiler an "Ada-like" language, and you can deviate as much as
you want from the standard.
David
--
[email protected]
http://www.kernel-panic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/kplug-lpsg
