From: "Michael" <fvit@shaw.ca>
Subject: Re: SPARK Proof - Tutorials and Tools
Date: Mon, 23 Mar 2009 07:55:41 -0700
Date: 2009-03-23T07:55:41-07:00 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <RpNxl.49955$eT1.33481@newsfe20.iad> (raw)
In-Reply-To: b+M9J4BFcjwJJw2$@diphi.demon.co.uk
Thank you Phil,
It is the best documentation and "how to use guide" ever made on this
subject.
That is a long overdue and great clarification on the SPARK purpose,
constraints and limitations.
(i.e.: Proof of Absence of Run-time Error).
"The Simplifier does not prove all provable Verification Conditions (a
provable VC is one where the conclusions can be shown to be logical
consequences of the hypotheses). Any VCs remaining after simplification may
be provable (but beyond the capability of the Simplifier to prove) or
unprovable."
That's start to make sense.
Mathematical approximations sometimes don't deal easily with computer
calculation errors.
I was assuming that is a flight trajectory/airspace intersection instability
risk that SPARK or Praxis's Correctness by construction can't easily
evaluate.
I think that shall confirm SPARK as one programming insurance tool (doing it
right), and don't compromise the use of Ada like a Computer Assisted
Engineering tool (doing the right thing).
Now, about knowing what we are doing, did you suggest the proof must be
elaborated once the functional behaviour has been thoroughly tested (unit,
non-regression, integration, verification, (validation) testing - all the
kit indeed)?
i.e.: "Proof Checker, (This option may lead to proofs that are difficult to
maintain.)"
Indeed, that is what could have prevented the Praxis's iFACTS project from
entering the wall. (see above for a plausible explanation)
And about project as complex and big than iFACTS, (I have another similar in
mind, and mind a responsible answer) would you suggest SPARK could still be
an affordable option, e.g.: taking into account the overhead that
annotations and proofs shall require (quite twice of the project's level of
effort, as I would figure - learning curve not entirely included)
Cheers,
Michael,
Vancouver, British Columbia
Praxis's Tokeneer demo is also available - example is still instructive, but
SPARK usage and limitations are poorly documented:
http://www.adacore.com/home/products/gnatpro/tokeneer/
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-03-23 14:55 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-03-19 12:13 ANN: SPARK Proof - Tutorials and Tools JP Thornley
2009-03-20 16:31 ` John McCormick
2009-03-23 14:55 ` Michael [this message]
2009-03-23 19:38 ` Tim Rowe
replies disabled
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox