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,f60ad9b53d897d45 X-Google-NewGroupId: yes X-Google-Attributes: gida07f3367d7,domainid0,public,usenet X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit Path: g2news2.google.com!news1.google.com!Xl.tags.giganews.com!border1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!local2.nntp.dca.giganews.com!news.giganews.com.POSTED!not-for-mail NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 16 Jan 2011 07:47:11 -0600 Date: Sun, 16 Jan 2011 08:47:10 -0500 From: "Peter C. Chapin" Organization: Vermont Technical College User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.1; en-US; rv:1.9.2.13) Gecko/20101207 Lightning/1.0b2 Thunderbird/3.1.7 MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: Question about round__ proof function in SPARK proofs. References: <150284e4-ec97-45ea-b09d-2ed83bfb92c0@j25g2000vbs.googlegroups.com> In-Reply-To: <150284e4-ec97-45ea-b09d-2ed83bfb92c0@j25g2000vbs.googlegroups.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: X-Usenet-Provider: http://www.giganews.com X-Trace: sv3-dZY6nsZL45ofNOU5EBaXVgjuor77G4OCNVY9L4fv3J/ARqtP5FsWqc6jt4RiV37K+rZAsaMR9ev1gdN!M5IDRtqezaJMiULtaJGKmg8hL2dtlDKdBuBPPTjRkf4s0akq/uAGFANbceqBKxg= X-Complaints-To: abuse@giganews.com X-DMCA-Notifications: http://www.giganews.com/info/dmca.html X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly X-Postfilter: 1.3.40 X-Original-Bytes: 1898 Xref: g2news2.google.com comp.lang.ada:17423 Date: 2011-01-16T08:47:10-05:00 List-Id: On 2011-01-15 13:11, Phil Thornley wrote: > You're quite correct about the round__ function - and the only way to > discharge the VC is to supply user rules that state properties of the > function. > > An obvious form for the rule is: > > round(1): round__(X) <= Y > may_be_deduced from > [ X <= Y, > goal(checktype(Y, integer)) ] . > > and similarly for the lower bound. Thanks so much for your suggestions. I'll try it out at my first opportunity. If I run into any other problems I'll be sure to post here again :) Peter