Re: Against executable specifications (Re: specifying OBJ in itself)

Article View: comp.specification

Article #206

Back to comp.specification Previous Next

#206

From: Ching-Tsun Chou
Date: Mon, 22 Oct 1990 20:22

15 lines
1057 bytes

In article <21617@dime.cs.umass.edu> yodaiken@chelm.cs.umass.edu (victor yodaiken) writes:

[.....]

>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.

Think about this:

Can you design a programming language in which ALL and NOTHING BUT total 
(in the sense of being convergent for all inputs) recursive functions
can be described?

Technical Details

Message-ID: <40496@shemp.CS.UCLA.EDU>

Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!attcan!uunet!wuarchive!usc!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!ucla-cs!oahu.cs.ucla.edu!chou

References: <21500@dime.cs.umass.edu> <5321@uqcspe.cs.uq.oz.au> <21617@dime.cs.umass.edu>

Show Full Headers

Complete Article Headers

Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!attcan!uunet!wuarchive!usc!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!ucla-cs!oahu.cs.ucla.edu!chou
From: chou@oahu.cs.ucla.edu (Ching-Tsun Chou)
Newsgroups: comp.specification
Subject: Re: Against executable specifications (Re: specifying OBJ in itself)
Message-ID: <40496@shemp.CS.UCLA.EDU>
Date: 22 Oct 90 20:22:35 GMT
References: <21500@dime.cs.umass.edu> <5321@uqcspe.cs.uq.oz.au> <21617@dime.cs.umass.edu>
Sender: news@CS.UCLA.EDU
Organization: UCLA Computer Science Department
Lines: 15
Nntp-Posting-Host: oahu.cs.ucla.edu

Reply to Parent Message