From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,
	REPLYTO_WITHOUT_TO_CC autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
Path: 
 eternal-september.org!reader01.eternal-september.org!reader02.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!mx02.eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!aioe.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: "Dmitry A. Kazakov" <mailbox@dmitry-kazakov.de>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: function Is_Open (File : File_Type) return Boolean; :Text_io
Date: Fri, 30 Oct 2015 17:20:34 +0100
Organization: cbb software GmbH
Message-ID: <18wdhboc0r4aj$.1rj6n8wv3scfd.dlg@40tude.net>
References: <f30bbb5d-ebfd-427b-8c16-88aeb8a61318@googlegroups.com>
 <87twpd2qlo.fsf@theworld.com> <1pj15r7pul7f1.15qgdyrc8k133$.dlg@40tude.net>
 <87pp0030c1.fsf@theworld.com> <135hiczk56x02.1xixcme8btbl4.dlg@40tude.net>
 <n0o9fb$3pq$2@dont-email.me> <1dzlgoh4u2j7t$.1un3dfy0oeigd$.dlg@40tude.net>
 <n0qa3q$th8$1@dont-email.me> <190shqocxd87d$.1d68ghgqgbvfs$.dlg@40tude.net>
 <n0t0t1$56e$1@dont-email.me> <19ihs115mzocg$.20s63jo0q2gf.dlg@40tude.net>
 <n0ufn3$e6$1@dont-email.me> <2qwfwnugm5q5.ajan0n5midql$.dlg@40tude.net>
 <n0vutc$hu6$1@dont-email.me>
Reply-To: mailbox@dmitry-kazakov.de
NNTP-Posting-Host: j6IQVb9uobzjXrpQLDU2rQ.user.speranza.aioe.org
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Complaints-To: abuse@aioe.org
User-Agent: 40tude_Dialog/2.0.15.1
X-Notice: Filtered by postfilter v. 0.8.2
Xref: news.eternal-september.org comp.lang.ada:28140
Date: 2015-10-30T17:20:34+01:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

On Fri, 30 Oct 2015 15:32:16 +0100, G.B. wrote:

> On 30.10.15 09:39, Dmitry A. Kazakov wrote:
>> The concern is safe design. If [program] B has bugs it cannot be
>> relied on to determine if it has them.
> 
> Uhm, so what?  Which kind of program is relied upon to determine
> if it has bugs or not?

A program that contains run-time checks for bugs.

> OTOH, what if we can learn about potential bugs because we happen
> to think that a failed expression has exactly that potential
> for us?

What kinds of answer do you expect?

> Detecting a false positive needs to be assessed empirically.

Positive of *what*? You first need a workable definition of a correct
program, which you don't have and cannot have because of the reasons
explained earlier.

-- 
Regards,
Dmitry A. Kazakov
http://www.dmitry-kazakov.de