Modified \<Sum> syntax a little.
<!-- $Id$ -->
<HTML><HEAD><TITLE>HOL/UNITY/README</TITLE></HEAD><BODY>
<H2>UNITY: Examples Involving Program Composition</H2>
<P>
The directory presents verification examples involving program composition.
They are mostly taken from the works of Chandy, Charpentier and Chandy.
<UL>
<LI>examples of <em>universal properties</em>:
the counter (<A HREF="Counter.thy"><CODE>Counter.thy</CODE></A>)
and priority system (<A HREF="Priority.thy"><CODE>Priority.thy</CODE></A>)
<LI>the allocation system (<A HREF="Alloc.thy"><CODE>Alloc.thy</CODE></A>)
<LI>client implementation (<A HREF="Client.thy"><CODE>Client.thy</CODE></A>)
<LI>allocator implementation (<A HREF="AllocImpl.thy"><CODE>AllocImpl.thy</CODE></A>)
<LI>the handshake protocol
(<A HREF="Handshake.thy"><CODE>Handshake.thy</CODE></A>)
<LI>the timer array (demonstrates arrays of processes)
(<A HREF="TimerArray.thy"><CODE>TimerArray.thy</CODE></A>)
</UL>
<P> Safety proofs (invariants) are often proved automatically. Progress
proofs involving ENSURES can sometimes be proved automatically. The
level of automation appears to be about the same as in HOL-UNITY by Flemming
Andersen et al.
<HR>
<P>Last modified on $Date$
<ADDRESS>
<A NAME="lcp@cl.cam.ac.uk" HREF="mailto:lcp@cl.cam.ac.uk">lcp@cl.cam.ac.uk</A>
</ADDRESS>
</BODY></HTML>