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=-0.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,FORGED_GMAIL_RCVD,
	FREEMAIL_FROM autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Received: by 2002:a6b:a112:: with SMTP id
 k18-v6mr2629636ioe.138.1529779641399;
        Sat, 23 Jun 2018 11:47:21 -0700 (PDT)
X-Received: by 2002:aca:d60f:: with SMTP id n15-v6mr462126oig.6.1529779641182;
 Sat, 23 Jun 2018 11:47:21 -0700 (PDT)
Path: 
 eternal-september.org!reader01.eternal-september.org!reader02.eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!feeder4.usenet.farm!feed.usenet.farm!weretis.net!feeder6.news.weretis.net!feeder.usenetexpress.com!feeder-in1.iad1.usenetexpress.com!border1.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!u78-v6no2024823itb.0!news-out.google.com!z3-v6ni2425iti.0!nntp.google.com!d7-v6no2038151itj.0!postnews.google.com!glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Date: Sat, 23 Jun 2018 11:47:20 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <59ea4fa7-f1e7-41c8-b386-c76cf7f6d788@googlegroups.com>
Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com
Injection-Info: glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com; posting-host=76.113.16.86;
 posting-account=lJ3JNwoAAAAQfH3VV9vttJLkThaxtTfC
NNTP-Posting-Host: 76.113.16.86
References: <584564c2-9f64-4965-b045-535cdaf899c0@googlegroups.com>
 <pgdtbd$7pd$1@dont-email.me>
 <7cb22c58-3009-47f0-8fe7-62f3cd61785d@googlegroups.com>
 <b09eac1a-0783-4a44-bb90-4820da4afe30@googlegroups.com>
 <pgjai9$bhp$1@dont-email.me>
 <pgkneo$tpa$1@gioia.aioe.org>
 <2d617160-ac33-40e6-a06a-97cc0b53062d@googlegroups.com>
 <6f103699-811e-45e2-83ee-3b3606239cd8@googlegroups.com>
 <59ea4fa7-f1e7-41c8-b386-c76cf7f6d788@googlegroups.com>
User-Agent: G2/1.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <35485cb1-7411-4843-a0b5-b87d79b9a93f@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: Why are Ada compilers difficult to write ?
From: Shark8 <onewingedshark@gmail.com>
Injection-Date: Sat, 23 Jun 2018 18:47:21 +0000
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Xref: reader02.eternal-september.org comp.lang.ada:53272
Date: 2018-06-23T11:47:20-07:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

On Saturday, June 23, 2018 at 12:12:37 PM UTC-6, Dan'l Miller wrote:
> On Saturday, June 23, 2018 at 11:14:53 AM UTC-5, Shark8 wrote:
> >=20
> > SPARK is better than Rust in terms of safety/reliability; there was a [=
possible] proposed extension to
> > SPARK to allow access-types in certain, controlled conditions that was =
shown to the ARG. (They asked
> > that we not promulgate it, I think because they wanted to publish/prese=
nt it for their academic career.)
>=20
> Don't say any more.  It might have been embargoed for a patent applicatio=
n not yet submitted.

I wasn't going to; just saying that there are efforts to bring safe, provab=
le access-types into SPARK. (And, actually, I'm certain there's several pub=
licly available papers on the general topic; I've come across a few... prob=
ably here: http://spark-2014.org/ )