Brian,
>>>> I don't see the point about "current technology". We are talking about
>>>> stuff which is over a century, respectively nearly half a century, old.
>>
>> The theory might be, but the practice is very resource intensive.
>
> Perhaps, but the MoD funded effort for an FD of SPARK was quite a bit
> of what would be needed.
Perhaps Rod can tell us what properties the FD of SPARK has been proved
to have.
> Also, if your 'model implementation' of C had been derived from a formal
> definition,
> if could act as a check in the way I am advocating!
The C Model Implementation was originally written in Pascal and
then converted to C.
Given the availability of tools for C it was possible to check
a lot more of its properties than if it had been written in some
formal definition language (we are talking early 1990's here).
www.knosof.co.uk/whoguard.html
However, whatever it had been written it, it would still be too big to
check for internal consistency even today.
--
Derek M. Jones tel: +44 (0) 1252 520 667
Knowledge Software Ltd mailto:derek@xxxxxx
Applications Standards Conformance Testing http://www.knosof.co.uk
Received on Thu 26 Oct 2006 - 11:35:40 BST