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=-0.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,
	REPLYTO_WITHOUT_TO_CC autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
Path: 
 eternal-september.org!reader01.eternal-september.org!reader02.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!mx02.eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!newsfeed.kamp.net!newsfeed.kamp.net!feeder.erje.net!1.eu.feeder.erje.net!nntpspool01.opticnetworks.net!aioe.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: "Dmitry A. Kazakov" <mailbox@dmitry-kazakov.de>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: function Is_Open (File : File_Type) return Boolean; :Text_io
Date: Sat, 31 Oct 2015 10:31:49 +0100
Organization: cbb software GmbH
Message-ID: <b0qn4s2ievhr.qfoi16ezp3o0.dlg@40tude.net>
References: <f30bbb5d-ebfd-427b-8c16-88aeb8a61318@googlegroups.com>
 <87twpd2qlo.fsf@theworld.com> <1pj15r7pul7f1.15qgdyrc8k133$.dlg@40tude.net>
 <87pp0030c1.fsf@theworld.com> <135hiczk56x02.1xixcme8btbl4.dlg@40tude.net>
 <n0o9fb$3pq$2@dont-email.me> <1dzlgoh4u2j7t$.1un3dfy0oeigd$.dlg@40tude.net>
 <n0qa3q$th8$1@dont-email.me> <190shqocxd87d$.1d68ghgqgbvfs$.dlg@40tude.net>
 <n0t0t1$56e$1@dont-email.me> <19ihs115mzocg$.20s63jo0q2gf.dlg@40tude.net>
 <n0ufn3$e6$1@dont-email.me> <2qwfwnugm5q5.ajan0n5midql$.dlg@40tude.net>
 <n0vutc$hu6$1@dont-email.me> <18wdhboc0r4aj$.1rj6n8wv3scfd.dlg@40tude.net>
 <n10f12$96c$1@dont-email.me>
Reply-To: mailbox@dmitry-kazakov.de
NNTP-Posting-Host: j6IQVb9uobzjXrpQLDU2rQ.user.speranza.aioe.org
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Complaints-To: abuse@aioe.org
User-Agent: 40tude_Dialog/2.0.15.1
X-Notice: Filtered by postfilter v. 0.8.2
Xref: news.eternal-september.org comp.lang.ada:28146
Date: 2015-10-31T10:31:49+01:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

On Fri, 30 Oct 2015 20:07:18 +0100, G.B. wrote:

> On 30.10.15 17:20, Dmitry A. Kazakov wrote:
>> On Fri, 30 Oct 2015 15:32:16 +0100, G.B. wrote:
>>
>>> On 30.10.15 09:39, Dmitry A. Kazakov wrote:
>>>> The concern is safe design. If [program] B has bugs it cannot be
>>>> relied on to determine if it has them.
>>>
>>> Uhm, so what?  Which kind of program is relied upon to determine
>>> if it has bugs or not?
>>
>> A program that contains run-time checks for bugs.
> 
> I don't think anybody says that, nor does "contract based design",

Anybody but you?

>> Positive of *what*?
> 
> Positive of what we now have learned may (not) be the desired outcome.

Thus:

"Detecting a false positive needs to be assessed empirically."

reads as

"Somebody needs empirically assess misinterpretation of desired outcomes as
undesired outcomes..."

May I suggest, for a start, do not misinterpret anything, then you won't
need to assess that later... (:-))

>> You first need a workable (...) definition of a correct
>> program
> 
> What makes you assume that a specific, formalistic definition of
> a correct program is the workable one?

Easy. Any non-contradictory definition is workable.

> Except per the narrow situation-excluding circularity of
> "work" = "operation":

Workable here = logically consistent.

You seem are under a [false] impression that since ideal circles do not
exist the car wheels can be made square...

-- 
Regards,
Dmitry A. Kazakov
http://www.dmitry-kazakov.de