Frama-C-discuss mailing list archives
This page gathers the archives of the old Frama-C-discuss archives, that was hosted by Inria's gforge before its demise at the end of 2020. To search for mails newer than September 2020, please visit the page of the new mailing list on Renater.
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[Frama-c-discuss] Standard C library specifications in the wild
- Subject: [Frama-c-discuss] Standard C library specifications in the wild
- From: cristiano.sousa126 at gmail.com (Cristiano Sousa)
- Date: Thu, 19 Mar 2015 15:39:58 +0000
- In-reply-to: <550ADF11.4050901@grammatech.com>
- References: <CACqTQPz4r+EX7D7S3zv6tXmJmHXZfKy18E8q6UJRrV4MHPC_bw@mail.gmail.com> <550ADF11.4050901@grammatech.com>
Dear all, There is already work done on the verification of kLIBC, which was published last year: link <http://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007%2F978-3-319-06200-6_29> (public copies are available, look for it) The public repository with annotated code can be found here <https://github.com/Beatgodes/klibc_framac_wp>. Kind Regards, Cristiano Sousa David R. Cok <dcok at grammatech.com> escreveu no dia qui, 19/03/2015 ?s 14:37: > I echo this inquiry. > > In addition, if any group would like to participate in (use and > contribute) a public repository of ACSL annotations on widely used > libraries - as we are - , please respond to this group. > > There are of course issues to work out. There are logistical issues such > as hosting location and copyright releases. There are also scientific > issues such as whether a common set of annotations can be widely used for > multiple tools and multiple applications. > > > - David > > > On 3/18/2015 2:55 PM, Andre Oliveira wrote: > > Dear all, > > It has been mentioned during the Frama-C day that better ACSL > specifications concerning the standard C library would be useful to the > platform. > > I would like to find out about existing public repositories with such > specifications, to have an idea of the kind of specifications that are > used, and also their level of detail. > > An example would be kLIBC, a subset of the C standard library with an > annotated implementation. I am also interested in pure specifications, > without an underlying implementation. > > > Regards, > Andr? Oliveira > > > _______________________________________________ > Frama-c-discuss mailing listFrama-c-discuss at lists.gforge.inria.frhttp://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/frama-c-discuss > > > _______________________________________________ > Frama-c-discuss mailing list > Frama-c-discuss at lists.gforge.inria.fr > http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/frama-c-discuss -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/pipermail/frama-c-discuss/attachments/20150319/d1566215/attachment.html>
- References:
- [Frama-c-discuss] Standard C library specifications in the wild
- From: androlivem at gmail.com (Andre Oliveira)
- [Frama-c-discuss] Standard C library specifications in the wild
- From: dcok at grammatech.com (David R. Cok)
- [Frama-c-discuss] Standard C library specifications in the wild
- Prev by Date: [Frama-c-discuss] Standard C library specifications in the wild
- Next by Date: [Frama-c-discuss] F-IDE 2015: Call for papers (FM2015 Workshop)
- Previous by thread: [Frama-c-discuss] Standard C library specifications in the wild
- Next by thread: [Frama-c-discuss] Astraver Toolset 1.0
- Index(es):