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=-0.8 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_DATE
	autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.3 4.3bsd-beta 6/6/85; site ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!ucbvax!ANDREW.CMU.EDU!ms1g
From: ms1g@ANDREW.CMU.EDU (Mark Steven Sherman)
Newsgroups: net.lang.ada
Subject: proedure parameters
Message-ID: <MS.ms1g.0.ishmael.239.4@andrew.cmu.edu>
Date: Fri, 20-Jun-86 08:25:54 EDT
Article-I.D.: andrew.MS.ms1g.0.ishmael.239.4
Posted: Fri Jun 20 08:25:54 1986
Date-Received: Sat, 21-Jun-86 13:24:58 EDT
Sender: daemon@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU
Organization: The ARPA Internet
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

Enough already. One can pass fully specified procedure parameters and type check
them at compile time. One can use name equivalence for the checking. The Acta
Inf. article does not contradict those statements, and there are both empirical
examples(I wrote a Paragon compiler that does so - which does not provide recrusive
modes in Algol 68 terms) and there are formal models (check out any axiomatic
description of complete Pascal -- if you can prove that a specification is met,
then you had to prove that type checking was correct). Acta Informatica is available
in nearly every technical library. Go read the article if you want to see what
it was about. (For those still interested, Clarke's article was in POPL several
years ago -- people who want the complete reference should contact me and I'll
dig it up.)