[comp.arch] Re^2: Reasons why you don't prove your programs are correct

kempf@tci.bell-atl.com (Cory Kempf) (01/11/90)

bzs@world.std.com (Barry Shein) writes:

>Yes, the flap in the early 80's was over automatic program
>verification. It seemed that DOD was considering putting $150M into
>this so the debate became quite bloody.

I should think that the idea would be silly on the face of it... after
all, wouldn't it need to have a subroutine that could solve the
halting problem?  Last time I looked, it was still considered
impossible.  Maybe on the new Cray IV??*

+C

* Have you heard about the new Cray IV?  It can solve an infinate loop
in just 7 seconds!
-- 
Cory Kempf		Technology Concepts	     phone: (508) 443-7311 x341
uucp:	{anywhere}!uunet!tci!kempf, kempf@tci.bell-atl.com
DISCLAIMER: TCI is not responsible for my opinions, nor I for theirs