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=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
Path: 
 eternal-september.org!reader01.eternal-september.org!reader02.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Simon Wright <simon@pushface.org>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: Why are Ada compilers difficult to write ?
Date: Sat, 23 Jun 2018 20:35:45 +0100
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Message-ID: <lybmc1i9da.fsf@pushface.org>
References: <584564c2-9f64-4965-b045-535cdaf899c0@googlegroups.com>
	<pgdtbd$7pd$1@dont-email.me>
	<7cb22c58-3009-47f0-8fe7-62f3cd61785d@googlegroups.com>
	<b09eac1a-0783-4a44-bb90-4820da4afe30@googlegroups.com>
	<pgjai9$bhp$1@dont-email.me> <pgkneo$tpa$1@gioia.aioe.org>
	<2d617160-ac33-40e6-a06a-97cc0b53062d@googlegroups.com>
	<6f103699-811e-45e2-83ee-3b3606239cd8@googlegroups.com>
	<59ea4fa7-f1e7-41c8-b386-c76cf7f6d788@googlegroups.com>
	<35485cb1-7411-4843-a0b5-b87d79b9a93f@googlegroups.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Injection-Info: reader02.eternal-september.org;
 posting-host="f17ff325a11ce261ed1721ba6e96943b";
	logging-data="1521"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";
	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1/8QpRepoPA7sMO4el1m3lf6NtHHiqf4z8="
User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/25.3 (darwin)
Cancel-Lock: sha1:QbUCyilz6Xmwuh4j+E4XTmP23Q8=
	sha1:12yyfZnGpSPSPhO8SCTjLE8MIgw=
Xref: reader02.eternal-september.org comp.lang.ada:53273
Date: 2018-06-23T20:35:45+01:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

Shark8 <onewingedshark@gmail.com> writes:

> On Saturday, June 23, 2018 at 12:12:37 PM UTC-6, Dan'l Miller wrote:
>> On Saturday, June 23, 2018 at 11:14:53 AM UTC-5, Shark8 wrote:
>> > 
>> > SPARK is better than Rust in terms of safety/reliability; there
>> > was a [possible] proposed extension to
>> > SPARK to allow access-types in certain, controlled conditions that
>> > was shown to the ARG. (They asked
>> > that we not promulgate it, I think because they wanted to
>> > publish/present it for their academic career.)
>> 
>> Don't say any more.  It might have been embargoed for a patent
>> application not yet submitted.
>
> I wasn't going to; just saying that there are efforts to bring safe,
> provable access-types into SPARK. (And, actually, I'm certain there's
> several publicly available papers on the general topic; I've come
> across a few... probably here: http://spark-2014.org/ )

https://arxiv.org/abs/1805.05576 (was posted on reddit/r/ada)