On Sat, Oct 25, 2008 at 1:17 PM, Russell Wallace <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Sat, Oct 25, 2008 at 9:57 AM, Vladimir Nesov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> Note that people are working on this specific technical problem for 30 >> years, (see the scary amount of work by Cousot's lab, >> http://www.di.ens.fr/~cousot/COUSOTpapers/ ), and they are still >> tackling fixed invariants, finding ways to summarize program code as >> transformations on domains containing families of assertions about >> program state, to handle loops, to work with more features of >> programming languages they analyze. And it all is still imprecise and >> is able to find only relatively weak assertions. Open-ended invention >> of assertions to reflect the effect of program code in a more adaptive >> way in even on a horizon. > > Look at it this way: at least we're agreed it's not such a trivial > problem as to be unworthy of a prototype AGI :-)
Except at this point I see nothing in common between this problem of scalable analysis of huge formal systems and generation of code to hand-written specification (at least if roadmap starts from code geneneration and not the other way around, in which case code generation can be said to be control guided by a model constructed using summarization of possible programs having required properties). -- Vladimir Nesov [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://causalityrelay.wordpress.com/ ------------------------------------------- agi Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/ Modify Your Subscription: https://www.listbox.com/member/?member_id=8660244&id_secret=117534816-b15a34 Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
