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,b78c363353551702
X-Google-NewGroupId: yes
X-Google-Attributes: gida07f3367d7,domainid0,public,usenet
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
Received: by 10.68.227.67 with SMTP id ry3mr13609250pbc.8.1341591453507;
        Fri, 06 Jul 2012 09:17:33 -0700 (PDT)
Path: 
 l9ni11017pbj.0!nntp.google.com!news2.google.com!goblin3!goblin1!goblin.stu.neva.ru!noris.net!newsfeed.arcor.de!newsspool4.arcor-online.net!news.arcor.de.POSTED!not-for-mail
Date: Fri, 06 Jul 2012 18:17:16 +0200
From: Georg Bauhaus <rm.dash-bauhaus@futureapps.de>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.7;
 rv:13.0) Gecko/20120614 Thunderbird/13.0.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: about the new Ada 2012 pre/post conditions
References: <jrsjr7$uuo$1@speranza.aioe.org>
 <1pkfv0tiod3rn$.onx6dmaa3if9$.dlg@40tude.net>
 <Pine.LNX.4.64.1206251438390.12735@medsec1.medien.uni-weimar.de>
 <1i1mp8xs3vtl2.1oc4m66qtfgzq.dlg@40tude.net>
 <Pine.LNX.4.64.1206251734140.12735@medsec1.medien.uni-weimar.de>
 <bdpvyb9h7rvt.zbq0kbiq72wj.dlg@40tude.net>
 <Pine.LNX.4.64.1206261316320.22921@medsec1.medien.uni-weimar.de>
 <xmybo646240w$.13rwa9qwsliyp$.dlg@40tude.net> <jstvu4$jh4$1@munin.nbi.dk>
 <a555h2psfssb$.1be3awg0xbewa.dlg@40tude.net> <jt2rjm$vhe$1@munin.nbi.dk>
 <33crfw5vkxoh$.kz5mq75s36ee.dlg@40tude.net>
 <43e4637c-3337-4d99-be45-20e054e5a203@googlegroups.com>
 <6ua1uo9zmkjn$.1tmqyzmetx71u$.dlg@40tude.net>
 <4ff6969e$0$9514$9b4e6d93@newsspool1.arcor-online.net>
 <1xkiqefb6watw.10fvt344m3c4g$.dlg@40tude.net>
 <4ff6a20a$0$9525$9b4e6d93@newsspool1.arcor-online.net>
 <1l7pg7ihwb9vn$.kq6k3ypjwl07.dlg@40tude.net>
 <4ff6d51a$0$9514$9b4e6d93@newsspool1.arcor-online.net>
 <7xnkuta2d94n$.1815f9iev4s7r$.dlg@40tude.net>
In-Reply-To: <7xnkuta2d94n$.1815f9iev4s7r$.dlg@40tude.net>
Message-ID: <4ff70f8e$0$9508$9b4e6d93@newsspool1.arcor-online.net>
Organization: Arcor
NNTP-Posting-Date: 06 Jul 2012 18:17:18 CEST
NNTP-Posting-Host: 5be61393.newsspool1.arcor-online.net
X-Trace: 
 DXC=Zcc`nlbO>a][7Non7UCi8Uic==]BZ:af^4Fo<]lROoRQnkgeX?EC@@PJkkRih[6<O]nc\616M64>ZLh>_cHTX3j]X4Q5if5]Oh\
X-Complaints-To: usenet-abuse@arcor.de
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Date: 2012-07-06T18:17:18+02:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

On 06.07.12 15:37, Dmitry A. Kazakov wrote:
> You say that the behaviour of
> sqrt(-1.0) is basically unspecified. This is where dynamic checks have led
> you into.

I said that the behavior of sqrt(-1.0) is basically unspecified
IFF the programmer

(a) violates the contract
(b) turns off contract checking

If the programmer doesn't do this, then the behavior of a program
calling sqrt(-1.0) is specified.

SPARK prevents the foolishness of (a) + (b) in a technical way,
for SPARK programs. General programs require tests at run-time
and programmer intervention. Like pragma Assert does, too.