[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
- To: Moon@stony-brook.scrc.symbolics.com
- Subject: Error Terminology
- From: Jon L White <edsel!jonl@labrea.Stanford.EDU>
- Date: Thu, 24 Mar 88 17:47:18 PST
- Cc: RPG@sail.stanford.edu, email@example.com
- In-reply-to: David A. Moon's message of Wed, 23 Mar 88 15:04 EST <19880323200429.4.MOON@EUPHRATES.SCRC.Symbolics.COM>
re: I'm not concerned about enforceability here, since this is a statement
about programs rather than about implementations,
Well, this is in a proposed part of a "spec"; and if that document makes
its specifications by reference to what "valid programs" do, and if those
specifications are inherently unenforceable, then no user will be able
to determine whether or not his code is a valid program. E.g., it might
be "invalid" only because he presumed that the undefined situation wouldn't
delete all the files in his file system; yet that is not such an unreasonable
requirement to expect even of "undefined" situations.
That's why I think some of this murky area should be handled as "design notes"
or "implemention notes" focusing on intent, rather than as "specifications".
-- JonL --