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: a07f3367d7,5add429c86f59001
X-Google-Attributes: gida07f3367d7,public,usenet
X-Google-NewGroupId: yes
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
Path: 
 g2news2.google.com!news4.google.com!feeder.news-service.com!feeder.motzarella.org!news.motzarella.org!news.eternal-september.org!not-for-mail
From: Nicholas Paul Collin Gloucester <Colin_Paul_Gloster@ACM.org>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: Ada vs Eiffel - Ada programmer approach
Date: Thu, 28 May 2009 08:37:56 +0000 (UTC)
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Message-ID: <gvlih4$hh6$1@news.eternal-september.org>
References: 
 <405b5054-4c8f-4e16-9ea8-503a9b9f976e@t21g2000yqi.googlegroups.com>
 <4A19765C.608@obry.net>
 <8105b65f-4de9-4653-b43a-d55ee33f072d@k2g2000yql.googlegroups.com>
 <4vCdnRo6At8-mIHXnZ2dnUVZ8n2dnZ2d@brightview.co.uk>
 <4a1c1aca$0$30229$9b4e6d93@newsspool1.arcor-online.net>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Trace: news.eternal-september.org
 U2FsdGVkX1+COrQcE3xBn7gF+mE3FQ40lFsP6RcOLML84wG2owmKy0Ip+Go38Cj7ZPKAmXI7Ilwu1T5y/qRkGHeg175mk7w4mOBtiub86yZ50bO7onnDx7LHihWCPCHZ+i+a/+ibL4GF1QcUnSQc23O2jrOz+RD0
X-Complaints-To: abuse@eternal-september.org
NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 28 May 2009 08:37:56 +0000 (UTC)
X-Auth-Sender: 
 U2FsdGVkX1/j0f3OuWUg3eDmZddS7yeAw2kmY9myZLiiByTT9j7syGd84/vi9cggVxvSoAM8NVU=
Cancel-Lock: sha1:SfhMDL9KxXCUEiBqjepiZm5plO8=
User-Agent: slrn/0.9.9p1 (Linux)
Xref: g2news2.google.com comp.lang.ada:6055
Date: 2009-05-28T08:37:56+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

On 2009-05-26, Georg Bauhaus <rm.dash-bauhaus@futureapps.de> wrote:

|-------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|"Tim Rowe schrieb:                                                       |
|> Ludovic Brenta wrote:                                                  |
|                                                                         |
|>> - in most of the examples I saw in the literature, only very simple   |
|>> subprograms would have a contract and the contract would mostly repeat|
|>> the body of the subprogram. This redundancy is counter-productive."   |
|-------------------------------------------------------------------------|

Such redundancy is also exhibited in the SPARK literature.

|-------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|"I tought that too, but don't consider redundancy counter-productive any |
|more; it makes me think twice.  In fact, trying to find a post-condition |
|---which must be consistent with the module invariant, for               |
|which there isn't any support in Ada yet---has forced my to simplify     |
|program structure. :-)  Isn't that a good thing?                         |
|                                                                         |
|[..]"                                                                    |
|-------------------------------------------------------------------------|

Maybe, maybe not. Maintaining the pre-conditions and the
post-conditions and the imperative code in-between may be more work,
if no matter how much one is forced, the imperative code could not be
simplified any further.

Regards,
Colin Paul Gloster