Return to the
comp.compilers page.
Search the
comp.compilers archives again.
| Related articles |
|---|
| language for (abstract) semantic specification vali.irimia@ntlworld.com (2004-06-09) |
| Re: language for (abstract) semantic specification nmm1@cus.cam.ac.uk (2004-06-11) |
| Re: language for (abstract) semantic specification jens.troeger@light-speed.de (2004-06-12) |
| Re: language for (abstract) semantic specification daniel_yokomiso@yahoo.com.br (Daniel Yokomiso) (2004-06-14) |
| Re: language for (abstract) semantic specification nmm1@cus.cam.ac.uk (2004-06-21) |
| Re: language for (abstract) semantic specification wclodius@lanl.gov (2004-06-26) |
| Re: language for (abstract) semantic specification Andreas.Prinz@hia.no (Andreas Prinz) (2004-06-30) |
| From: | "Daniel Yokomiso" <daniel_yokomiso@yahoo.com.br> |
| Newsgroups: | comp.compilers |
| Date: | 14 Jun 2004 17:45:45 -0400 |
| Organization: | Compilers Central |
| References: | 04-06-029 04-06-037 |
| Keywords: | semantics |
| Posted-Date: | 14 Jun 2004 17:45:45 EDT |
"Nick Maclaren" <nmm1@cus.cam.ac.uk> escreveu na mensagem
> vali.irimia@ntlworld.com (Vali) writes:
> |>
> |> I've been searching the web for a kind of semantic specification
> |> language (for C code) that is really used in practice somewhere. I've
> |> found that PC-Lint has something for function semantics (-sem option)
> |> but I'm looking for something more complex/flexible and maybe already
> |> in use in some real applications.
>
> I have looked at this a few times, and the situation is dire.
Wasn't VDM-SL designed for "real use"? It's been a while since I studied it
but IIRC it's quite capable.
http://web.archive.org/web/20021219101053/http://www.cs.waikato.ac.nz/Teaching/0657.301B/Books/V-Book/
There was a excellent tutorial book from Waikato available online but it
seems to have disappeared. Fortunately archive.org has a copy of it.
Best regards,
Daniel Yokomizo.
Return to the
comp.compilers page.
Search the
comp.compilers archives again.