Re: Formal methods?

[JB]

Agree. Obviously boot code needs to be in ASM, but the applications
components like servers and whatever could be in a language which the code
is easier to manage, debug and prove its correctness. My votes are with Java
and Standard C++. OOP the whole lot to the hilt.

James Buchanan

----- Original Message -----
From: "Chiaki Ishikawa" <Chiaki.Ishikawa@personal-media.co.jp>
To: <mrs35@cam.ac.uk>
Cc: <help-hurd@gnu.org>
Sent: Wednesday, December 06, 2000 11:17 PM
Subject: Re: Formal methods?


> X-PMC-CI-e-mail-id: 14225
>
> Hi,
>
> >I think it would be much more useful and interesting to reimplement a
> >Hurd server in a high level language, such as Erlang (which has a lot
> >of support for concurrency) or a concurrent version of Haskell or ML.
> >Functional languages are often regarded as `executable
> >specifications'.
>
> How efficient the real-world implementation of the
> language runtime of these languages such as Erlang, Haskell, or ML?
>
> Depending on the efficiency, I won't be surprised if some
> application-oriented daemons are written in these
> high-level languages: for example, some type of
> encryption/certification servers may be written
> for correctness with a small library
> for number crunching.
>
> One of these days, proving the correctness and improving the
> security of this type of servers
> is very important.
>
> --
>      Ishikawa, Chiaki        ishikawa@personal-media.co.jp.NoSpam  or
>  (family name, given name) Chiaki.Ishikawa@personal-media.co.jp.NoSpam
>     Personal Media Corp.      ** Remove .NoSpam at the end before use **
>   Shinagawa, Tokyo, Japan 142-0051
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Help-hurd mailing list
> Help-hurd@gnu.org
> http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/help-hurd
>