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-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,67afd31696e08d55 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2003-03-24 12:11:43 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!syros.belnet.be!news.belnet.be!uni-erlangen.de!news-nue1.dfn.de!news-mue1.dfn.de!newsfeed.vmunix.org!news-FFM2.ecrc.net!news.iks-jena.de!not-for-mail From: Lutz Donnerhacke Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: Ada and Design By Contract Date: Mon, 24 Mar 2003 20:11:42 +0000 (UTC) Organization: IKS GmbH Jena Message-ID: References: <3E7EE470.5030807@praxis-cs.co.uk> NNTP-Posting-Host: belenus.iks-jena.de X-Trace: branwen.iks-jena.de 1048536702 13193 217.17.192.34 (24 Mar 2003 20:11:42 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@iks-jena.de NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 24 Mar 2003 20:11:42 +0000 (UTC) User-Agent: slrn/0.9.7.4 (Linux) Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:35660 Date: 2003-03-24T20:11:42+00:00 List-Id: * Volkert wrote: >> To keept this thread under some sort of control, I suggest we agree a >> clear distinction between contracts enforced at run time (by the >> evaluation of checks and, typically, the raising of exceptions if the >> contract is vilated) and contracts enforced statically, prior to >> execuation (typically using proof technology). > I know Spark and i like it, but my question is more in the direction > of Eiffel-like Assertion mechanisms (runtime monitoring/checking). So you are looking for Anna. The sites are off since years, but the Internet archive did have it two years ago.