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,FREEMAIL_FROM
	autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Thread: a07f3367d7,23c0de5a42cf667e
X-Google-Attributes: gida07f3367d7,public,usenet
X-Google-NewGroupId: yes
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,UTF8
Path: 
 g2news2.google.com!news3.google.com!proxad.net!feeder1-2.proxad.net!usenet-fr.net!gegeweb.org!aioe.org!not-for-mail
From: =?utf-8?Q?Yannick_Duch=C3=AAne_=28Hibou57?=
 =?utf-8?Q?=29?=
 <yannick_duchene@yahoo.fr>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: GNAT packages in Linux distributions
Date: Thu, 13 May 2010 02:33:12 +0200
Organization: Ada At Home
Message-ID: <op.vcmbtmytule2fv@garhos>
References: <j5e1x31qvn1b$.11ywrjmshtauz$.dlg@40tude.net>
 <87mxw9x7no.fsf@ludovic-brenta.org>
 <t8liq7w6ffnm$.19yq5hkq6tdto$.dlg@40tude.net> <op.vcgi9oqzule2fv@garhos>
 <w1q9e75h9kzi.4p81vh3kannn$.dlg@40tude.net> <op.vch6dsqmxmjfy8@garhos>
 <16bz9kvbqa8y9$.155ntpwpwl29d.dlg@40tude.net>
 <4be97bea$0$2966$ba4acef3@reader.news.orange.fr> <op.vcjtnsp5xmjfy8@garhos>
 <quqkqeas8pu2$.1w5pelct29juv.dlg@40tude.net>
 <Pine.LNX.4.64.1005121017020.21749@medsec1.medien.uni-weimar.de>
NNTP-Posting-Host: FD8vExnEy5iRSNWAUP6U/Q.user.speranza.aioe.org
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed; delsp=yes
Content-Transfer-Encoding: Quoted-Printable
X-Complaints-To: abuse@aioe.org
X-Notice: Filtered by postfilter v. 0.8.2
User-Agent: Opera Mail/10.53 (Win32)
Xref: g2news2.google.com comp.lang.ada:11574
Date: 2010-05-13T02:33:12+02:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

Le Wed, 12 May 2010 10:41:03 +0200, <stefan-lucks@see-the.signature> a  =

=C3=A9crit:
> BTW, SPARK also only provides partial correctness, but no total
> correctness. While SPARK allows to prove that no exception is raised (=
*),
> it lacks the option to specify (and verify, of course) variants for
> WHILE-loops (**). Eiffel supports such
> invariants.
>
> [...]
>
> (**) I just read that the most recent version of SPARK is able to deal=

>      with generics. Great! Maybe, SPARK has also recently learned how =
to
>      specify and prove loop variants?
At the end of [Praxis SPARK 95 4.5] you may read the following :


> It is also guaranteed that code is =E2=80=9Creducible=E2=80=9D, i.e. t=
hat
> every loop has a single entry point, simplifying the
> generation of verification conditions from loop invariants.

So there are some proofs also made on loops at least (still need to lear=
n  =

more).

-- =

pragma Asset ? Is that true ? Waaww... great