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=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00
	autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
Path: 
 eternal-september.org!reader01.eternal-september.org!reader02.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: SPARK vs. Ada 2012 for static analysis
Date: Thu, 15 Aug 2013 10:18:42 -0700
Organization: Nightsong/Fort GNOX
Message-ID: <7xwqnmvpn1.fsf@ruckus.brouhaha.com>
References: <87mwojxs80.fsf@adaheads.sparre-andersen.dk>
	<7xzjsjckgf.fsf@ruckus.brouhaha.com>
	<87eh9vxg2u.fsf_-_@adaheads.sparre-andersen.dk>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Injection-Info: mx05.eternal-september.org;
 posting-host="d94d289a4df6ae47ea4d4f8b2ae808e7";
	logging-data="21440"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";
	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX19ZXlQkjgf7rrMHt9F7gbEB"
User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.1 (gnu/linux)
Cancel-Lock: sha1:b6ZYfQ2b3mmcWdZ1GyCOxwwSK4Q=
	sha1:xQG/n+LcVXYoikc6y99+ks515PA=
Xref: news.eternal-september.org comp.lang.ada:16882
Date: 2013-08-15T10:18:42-07:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

Jacob Sparre Andersen <jacob@jacob-sparre.dk> writes:
> As I see things, the important place for complete static analysis
> (i.e. SPARK) 

I didn't have the impression SPARK does -complete- static analysis, but
just that it did more than plain Ada does.  You have a reasonable amount
of control over what it does statically.