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=0.4 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,FORGED_MUA_MOZILLA
	autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Thread: 103376,ea5071f634c2ea8b
X-Google-NewGroupId: yes
X-Google-Attributes: gida07f3367d7,domainid0,public,usenet
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
Received: by 10.68.15.41 with SMTP id u9mr4391878pbc.3.1322056863446;
        Wed, 23 Nov 2011 06:01:03 -0800 (PST)
Path: 
 lh20ni9219pbb.0!nntp.google.com!news1.google.com!goblin1!goblin.stu.neva.ru!news.astraweb.com!border5.a.newsrouter.astraweb.com!xlned.com!feeder1.xlned.com!npeer.de.kpn-eurorings.net!npeer-ng0.de.kpn-eurorings.net!newsfeed.arcor.de!newsspool2.arcor-online.net!news.arcor.de.POSTED!not-for-mail
Date: Wed, 23 Nov 2011 14:59:31 +0100
From: Georg Bauhaus <rm.dash-bauhaus@futureapps.de>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.6;
 rv:8.0) Gecko/20111105 Thunderbird/8.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: Generic-Package Elaboration Question / Possible GNAT Bug.
References: 
 <7bf9bc32-850a-40c6-9ae2-5254fe220533@f29g2000yqa.googlegroups.com>
 <wcc1ut14o97.fsf@shell01.TheWorld.com>
 <128rdz2581345$.c4td19l7qp9z$.dlg@40tude.net> <jaecvt$4tp$1@dont-email.me>
 <16ipwvpdavifr$.17bxf7if7f6kh$.dlg@40tude.net>
 <4ecb78b1$0$6643$9b4e6d93@newsspool2.arcor-online.net>
 <1iofgbqznsviu$.phvidtvxlyj4$.dlg@40tude.net>
 <4ecbb96e$0$6581$9b4e6d93@newsspool3.arcor-online.net>
 <vagow98uvk3n$.198v2ms719j4e$.dlg@40tude.net>
 <4ecbdfdb$0$6629$9b4e6d93@newsspool2.arcor-online.net>
 <12hfiflyf7pr5$.l3pkpgoid8xt$.dlg@40tude.net> <jah2np$7fp$1@munin.nbi.dk>
 <1ecuhb030iugz.4q1hfjx371xa.dlg@40tude.net>
 <4ecc393d$0$7625$9b4e6d93@newsspool1.arcor-online.net>
 <124aq618dmove.884jj64mzm6w$.dlg@40tude.net> <m2mxbn89qz.fsf@pushface.org>
 <1jxx617mf2cqf$.1j076axdq83mr$.dlg@40tude.net>
 <4eccd308$0$6623$9b4e6d93@newsspool2.arcor-online.net>
 <usf5lnuxppfc$.1i7xx1ekcwtk3.dlg@40tude.net>
 <4eccd849$0$6623$9b4e6d93@newsspool2.arcor-online.net>
 <1n04ab6q3dg0$.1dthih58wz7sl.dlg@40tude.net>
In-Reply-To: <1n04ab6q3dg0$.1dthih58wz7sl.dlg@40tude.net>
Message-ID: <4eccfc43$0$6584$9b4e6d93@newsspool3.arcor-online.net>
Organization: Arcor
NNTP-Posting-Date: 23 Nov 2011 14:59:31 CET
NNTP-Posting-Host: 05693fb3.newsspool3.arcor-online.net
X-Trace: 
 DXC=jgO;aM<B1cc9kIfcjg:0fdMcF=Q^Z^V3h4Fo<]lROoRa8kF<OcfhCOk3YJi2hk2k\anc\616M64>jLh>_cHTX3jmLVMda?J3b>d
X-Complaints-To: usenet-abuse@arcor.de
Xref: news1.google.com comp.lang.ada:19085
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Date: 2011-11-23T14:59:31+01:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

On 23.11.11 14:14, Dmitry A. Kazakov wrote:
> On Wed, 23 Nov 2011 12:25:56 +0100, Georg Bauhaus wrote:
> 
>> On 23.11.11 12:13, Dmitry A. Kazakov wrote:
>>> On Wed, 23 Nov 2011 12:03:34 +0100, Georg Bauhaus wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 23.11.11 10:56, Dmitry A. Kazakov wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> P.S. I hope everybody agrees that dynamic pre-/post-conditions are a part
>>>>> of the implementation?
>>>>
>>>> I don't agree. pre/post should specify what the implementation is
>>>> supposed to do.
>>>
>>> In that case they cannot be executable.
>>
>>  From the point of view of CS trivia, they cannot be executable.
>> But this point of view is not applicable,
> 
> I don't see why doing something wrong should make it more applicable. Maybe
> because the criteria of applicability are distorted as well?

If it is wrong to assume that a compiler is correct
(which is why there is verification of object code),
then, since we use compilers regardless, there exists
a criterion that applies when we use compilers.
Formal CS is thus overridden.