Here's another thing I believe: The next mainstream programming language (or family of them) will have functional-logic underpinnings like backtracking, unification, and failure. The move will be driven by the improvements in writing code that's concise, correct, and verifiable.
-
-
It's easy to characterize what you call "verification in the small" as properties that can be readily expressed as what's called inductive properties (also, compositional properties). It is also easy to show that most interesting program properties do not have this quality.
-
It's certainly likely that tooling that allows more inductive properties to be easily verified would help us write better programs, but it is unclear by how much. It is also likely that any (probably small) progress will be quickly dwarfed by growing requirements.
- 3 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
Verification "in the small" as you put it is handled in languages with refinement types, or even dependent types. I only know some research languages, but have you looked into Liquid Haskell or Idris?
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.