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=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Thread: 103376,e646052dc594401f X-Google-NewGroupId: yes X-Google-Attributes: gida07f3367d7,domainid0,public,usenet X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit Path: g2news2.google.com!news4.google.com!border1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!npeer01.iad.highwinds-media.com!news.highwinds-media.com!feed-me.highwinds-media.com!post02.iad.highwinds-media.com!news.flashnewsgroups.com-b7.4zTQh5tI3A!not-for-mail From: Stephen Leake Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: Strategies with SPARK which does not support exceptions References: <93966134-a285-41c5-a7f6-8c59151718a7@k39g2000yqb.googlegroups.com> Date: Tue, 29 Jun 2010 04:39:52 -0400 Message-ID: <82hbkm2pwn.fsf@stephe-leake.org> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.1 (windows-nt) Cancel-Lock: sha1:jvf2w9NZTXw7vdv8UkrUohu3A2Y= MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Complaints-To: abuse@flashnewsgroups.com Organization: FlashNewsgroups.com X-Trace: ef4f84c29b16de197caa715250 Xref: g2news2.google.com comp.lang.ada:12952 Date: 2010-06-29T04:39:52-04:00 List-Id: Warren writes: > So I suppose that I do agree with you, provided you > are rigourous in your proofs. But for run of the mill > stuff (that I work on), where that kind of testing is > not done, then exceptions are in my mind "good enough", > and perhaps even preferred. In an ideal world, SPARK could handle programs with exceptions, and we'd have both proofs and localized well-designed exception handling. -- -- Stephe