Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.lang.python > #19845
| Date | 2012-02-03 22:11 +0100 |
|---|---|
| From | Stefan Krah <stefan-usenet@bytereef.org> |
| Subject | Re: [ANN] cdecimal-2.3 released |
| References | <mailman.5376.1328216447.27778.python-list@python.org> <7xfwespe1f.fsf@ruckus.brouhaha.com> |
| Newsgroups | comp.lang.python |
| Message-ID | <mailman.5422.1328303476.27778.python-list@python.org> (permalink) |
Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> wrote: > > Both cdecimal and libmpdec have an extremely conservative release policy. > > When new features are added, the complete test suite is run both with and > > without Valgrind on many different platforms. With the added tests against > > decNumber, this takes around 8 months on four cores. > > Wow. I wonder whether it's worth looking into some formal verification > if the required level of confidence is that high. Currently four of the main algorithms (newton-div, inv-sqrt, sqrt, log) and a couple of auxiliary functions have proofs in ACL2. The results are mechanically verified Lisp forms that are guaranteed to produce results *within correct error bounds* in a conforming Lisp implementation. Proving full conformance to the specification including all rounding modes, Overflow etc. would be quite a bit of additional work. For C, I think the why3 tool should be a good approach: http://why3.lri.fr/ The verification of the L4 kernel allegedly took 30 man-years, so it might take a while... Stefan Krah
Back to comp.lang.python | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
[ANN] cdecimal-2.3 released Stefan Krah <stefan@bytereef.org> - 2012-02-02 21:54 +0100
Re: [ANN] cdecimal-2.3 released Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2012-02-02 23:33 -0800
Re: [ANN] cdecimal-2.3 released Stefan Krah <stefan-usenet@bytereef.org> - 2012-02-03 22:11 +0100
csiph-web