Anonymous user
Rosetta Code:Village Pump/Specification Languages: Difference between revisions
Rosetta Code:Village Pump/Specification Languages (view source)
Revision as of 16:01, 1 August 2013
, 10 years agoIf it can't be executed ...
(What about specification language? (2nd try)) |
(If it can't be executed ...) |
||
Line 8:
So, is it programming languages only, or do we tolerate languages that are only "somewhat executable"? - [[User:Wmeyer|Wmeyer]] ([[User talk:Wmeyer|talk]]) 14:51, 1 August 2013 (UTC)
:Hi, reading [[wp:Specification language]], I found:
::''Specifications must be subject to a process of refinement (the filling-in of implementation detail) before they can actually be implemented. The result of such a refinement process is an executable algorithm, which is either formulated in a programming language, or in an executable subset of the specification language at hand.''
:Then it should be OK to give examples written in an executable subset of such specification languages if one exists otherwise I would think that if it cannot be executed then it would not be suitable for comparison with other examples. Maybe the un-refined and refined to an executable could be given, but if the executable source is in another language then that may cause issues with the normal tasks example headers. --[[User:Paddy3118|Paddy3118]] ([[User talk:Paddy3118|talk]]) 16:01, 1 August 2013 (UTC)
| |||