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=-1.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID
	autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 103376,8e64f4db20d57eb5
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
From: ok@goanna.cs.rmit.edu.au (Richard A. O'Keefe)
Subject: Re: Call by reference vs. call by value
Date: 1996/07/24
Message-ID: <4t4rai$9g5@goanna.cs.rmit.edu.au>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 169888958
references: <31F10E50.726@egr.uri.edu> <dewar.837901109@schonberg>
 <DuwxvJ.G4t@world.std.com> <dewar.837995690@schonberg>
 <Duy5ur.4Dt@world.std.com>
 <Pine.SUN.3.91.960723082703.22250A-100000@erlang.praxis.co.uk>
organization: Comp Sci, RMIT, Melbourne, Australia
nntp-posting-user: ok
newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Date: 1996-07-24T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>


Peter Amey <pna@erlang.praxis.co.uk> writes:

>This is another Ada feature well covered by the SPARK subset.  The rules 
>of SPARK (which are checked by the SPARK Examiner) prohibit ...

It sounds as though the SPARK Examiner is a static checker something
along the lines of the PFORT checker only more so.  I do hope this is
something a CS department in an era of 10% education funding cuts can
get at an academic price it can afford to pay...

Can you offer a thumbnail sketch of what the SPARK subset is?

-- 
Fifty years of programming language research, and we end up with C++ ???
Richard A. O'Keefe; http://www.cs.rmit.edu.au/~ok; RMIT Comp.Sci.