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
X-Google-Thread: 103376,6d79efdb8dde2c5a
X-Google-NewGroupId: yes
X-Google-Attributes: gida07f3367d7,domainid0,public,usenet
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII
Path: 
 g2news1.google.com!news3.google.com!feeder.news-service.com!news.netcologne.de!newsfeed-fusi2.netcologne.de!newsfeed.straub-nv.de!noris.net!newsfeed.arcor.de!newsspool3.arcor-online.net!news.arcor.de.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: "Dmitry A. Kazakov" <mailbox@dmitry-kazakov.de>
Subject: Re: Categories for SPARK on Rosetta Code (Was: SPARK : third example
 for Roesetta - reviewers welcome)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
User-Agent: 40tude_Dialog/2.0.15.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Reply-To: mailbox@dmitry-kazakov.de
Organization: cbb software GmbH
References: <op.vhguffh3ule2fv@garhos>
 <589eea9a-0b14-4ae5-bf62-9abf4b33e7fb@i31g2000yqm.googlegroups.com>
 <i49oif$1c85$1@adenine.netfront.net> <op.vhh3bwnwxmjfy8@garhos>
 <82mxsnuhbq.fsf@stephe-leake.org>
 <b08743ce-a85f-4962-8fbb-c2601b9cc4a1@x21g2000yqa.googlegroups.com>
 <op.vhjindufxmjfy8@garhos> <4c69a251$0$2371$4d3efbfe@news.sover.net>
 <op.vhjyi5kkxmjfy8@garhos> <4c69cd5f$0$2375$4d3efbfe@news.sover.net>
 <e614687a-58ce-499f-a6af-a5893cbdc812@q22g2000yqm.googlegroups.com>
 <1ddee5a6-fc25-4d23-bebd-3364923d0aa5@z10g2000yqb.googlegroups.com>
 <aihbzmy85j4v.163hyfnglvwus.dlg@40tude.net>
 <7cf71c68-4faf-4a7b-a350-405ff7f12ff9@z10g2000yqb.googlegroups.com>
 <4xb6sjkpzo1r$.138841gile5s0$.dlg@40tude.net>
 <87wrrnjf9f.fsf_-_@hugsarin.sparre-andersen.dk>
 <3ed38f7f-372d-422e-9bda-eca8a73d3f0d@x21g2000yqa.googlegroups.com>
 <C8945F30.14D780%yaldnif.w@blueyonder.co.uk>
Date: Fri, 20 Aug 2010 18:42:18 +0200
Message-ID: <o93aihc3g4fx$.84ktrjixdexw.dlg@40tude.net>
NNTP-Posting-Date: 20 Aug 2010 18:42:15 CEST
NNTP-Posting-Host: cdbf03b3.newsspool1.arcor-online.net
X-Trace: 
 DXC=;Pm[B>XEGCbFXUDVUnEXQmic==]BZ:afn4Fo<]lROoRa<`=YMgDjhgbd2OU1aaAFVd[6LHn;2LCVn[<mhadbfdUk9ndRAC\T8kiifl:EUgOQBe
X-Complaints-To: usenet-abuse@arcor.de
Xref: g2news1.google.com comp.lang.ada:13543
Date: 2010-08-20T18:42:15+02:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

On Fri, 20 Aug 2010 16:34:56 +0100, (see below) wrote:

> On 20/08/2010 09:40, in article
> 3ed38f7f-372d-422e-9bda-eca8a73d3f0d@x21g2000yqa.googlegroups.com, "Phil
> Thornley" <phil.jpthornley@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
>> On 19 Aug, 07:19, Jacob Sparre Andersen <spa...@nbi.dk> wrote:
>>> Dmitry A. Kazakov wrote:
>>>> Phil Thornley wrote:
>>>>> Dmitry A. Kazakov wrote:
>>>>>> I would also suggest Rosetta Maintainers a new category (we should
>>>>>> invent a good clear name for it, e.g. "static analysis", "DbC",
>>>>>> "provability") to add it to this:
>>> 
>>>>>> http://rosettacode.org/wiki/Language_Comparison_Table
>>> 
>>>>> Seem's a good idea - how about "statically analysable".
>>> 
>>>> It is too vague. In some sense any language is, after all there exist
>>>> static analysis tool for C. SPARK is obviously more than that, but it
>>>> is tricky to formulate the difference.
>>> 
>>> Maybe we should simply introduce several categories.
>>> 
>>> �+ Provable free of exceptions (run-time errors?)
>>> �+ Finite memory use.
>>> �+ Free of unreachable code.
>>> �+ ...?
>>> 
>>> I'm not quite sure exactly which categories I would formulate. �Maybe
>>> somebody from Spark-Team at Praxis can help us with some good
>>> suggestions.
>> I suspect that if we can't come up with an obvious phrase for what we
>> mean then there's no chance of other language users understanding what
>> we mean by it and using it correctly.
> 
> Proof-oriented?

I like it!

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