Re: about the new Ada 2012 pre/post conditions

[Georg Bauhaus <rm.dash-bauhaus@futureapps.de>]

On 22.06.12 14:43, Dmitry A. Kazakov wrote:
> On Fri, 22 Jun 2012 13:54:16 +0200, Georg Bauhaus wrote:
> 
>> On 22.06.12 09:23, Dmitry A. Kazakov wrote:
>>> Neither #1 nor #2 is defendable.
>>
>> Maybe dynamic checking is not defendable when the attack is
>> based on some biased, and, frankly, narrow set of assumptions.
> 
> Sure, the most effective defence is just not to take any position. You
> might get exposed otherwise.

Who isn't taking a position?

Sir Tony Hoare back then took the position that Ada would
be far too big. Jean Ichbiah more or less answered in 1984 that
Ada is not to be measured against the capabilities of two guys
sitting in the corner wanting to understand everything about.


> BTW, narrower the set of assumptions is, wider is the context where the
> conclusion stays true.

As context is widened, the set of assumptions being narrowed,
the more specific and less informative the full text.
Context widening forces a general concept such as pre/post
to be specific, which it isn't.

I bet that most car electronics software does assume a flat earth
for velocity vectors.