Re: SPARK code samples

["(see below)" <yaldnif.w@blueyonder.co.uk>]

On 11/08/2010 17:07, in article
fa1507ef-77a8-4a28-b271-2293c5115278@j8g2000yqd.googlegroups.com, "Mark
Lorenzen" <mark.lorenzen@gmail.com> wrote:

> On 11 Aug., 13:38, Ada novice <ycalleecha...@gmx.com> wrote:
>> 
>> Thanks for this information. I'm interested to learn SPARK. If I
>> understand correctly, SPARK aligns itself well with Ada 95 and not yet
>> with Ada 05. Is this because of the strictness of SPARK to provide
>> highly reliable codes and hence it contains only well-tested features
>> (subset of Ada features)? It would be interesting to see some SPARK
>> codes on the wiki page building over time.
> 
> Not quite. SPARK is a proper subset of Ada and is amenable to static
> analysis. This has (in principle) nothing to do with if an Ada feature
> is well-tested or not. You should think of SPARK as a language in its
> own right and not as a subset of some other language.

Why?

-- 
Bill Findlay
<surname><forename> chez blueyonder.co.uk