Article View: comp.specification
Article #205Re: Against executable specifications (Re: specifying OBJ in itself)
From: victor yodaiken
Date: Mon, 22 Oct 1990 12:30
Date: Mon, 22 Oct 1990 12:30
15 lines
1301 bytes
1301 bytes
In article <5321@uqcspe.cs.uq.oz.au> brendan@batserver.cs.uq.oz.au writes: >yodaiken@chelm.cs.umass.edu (victor yodaiken) writes: > >>Why would you need to be able to specify divergent programs? >>What possible computational interpretation would such a specification >>correspond to? > >No you want to be able to specify that it does not diverge! You can't do >this in any executable notation. > In a well defined executable notation, you should only be able to specify systems that will not diverge. That is, construction of a specification should itself constitute a proof that the specified system is non divergent.
Technical Details
Message-ID:
<21617@dime.cs.umass.edu>Path:
arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!attcan!uunet!wuarchive!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!rpi!bu.edu!husc6!m2c!umvlsi!dime!yodaikenReferences:
<6470@vanuata.cs.glasgow.ac.uk> <4955@tuminfo1.lan.informatik.tu-muenchen.dbp.de> <5289@uqcspe.cs.uq.oz.au> <21500@dime.cs.umass.edu> <5321@uqcspe.cs.uq.oz.au>Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!attcan!uunet!wuarchive!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!rpi!bu.edu!husc6!m2c!umvlsi!dime!yodaiken From: yodaiken@chelm.cs.umass.edu (victor yodaiken) Newsgroups: comp.specification Subject: Re: Against executable specifications (Re: specifying OBJ in itself) Message-ID: <21617@dime.cs.umass.edu> Date: 22 Oct 90 12:30:50 GMT References: <6470@vanuata.cs.glasgow.ac.uk> <4955@tuminfo1.lan.informatik.tu-muenchen.dbp.de> <5289@uqcspe.cs.uq.oz.au> <21500@dime.cs.umass.edu> <5321@uqcspe.cs.uq.oz.au> Sender: news@dime.cs.umass.edu Reply-To: yodaiken@chelm.cs.umass.edu (victor yodaiken) Organization: University of Massachusetts, Amherst Lines: 15