FSharpPlus
FStar
Our great sponsors
FSharpPlus | FStar | |
---|---|---|
6 | 42 | |
821 | 2,567 | |
1.7% | 1.4% | |
8.8 | 9.9 | |
2 months ago | about 8 hours ago | |
F# | F* | |
Apache License 2.0 | Apache License 2.0 |
Stars - the number of stars that a project has on GitHub. Growth - month over month growth in stars.
Activity is a relative number indicating how actively a project is being developed. Recent commits have higher weight than older ones.
For example, an activity of 9.0 indicates that a project is amongst the top 10% of the most actively developed projects that we are tracking.
FSharpPlus
- Is it possible to add a NuGet package dependency to a project that points to a GitHub repository?
-
What is the difference between an Applicative and a Monad?
This should all be prefaced by saying that F# tends to avoid such category theory generalizations (unless you're using a library such as F#+ ). So, while I would encourage your continued understanding of the theory (it can be fun!), it's not as practical for writing good F# code as it would be in, say, Haskell. There are no type classes in Haskell, nor are there plans to add them.
-
Don Syme explains the downsides of type classes and the technical and philosophical reasons for not implementing them in F#
There maybe be a way to make it not have overhead. But there is precedent that this is not the case with Statically Resolved Type Parameters, and existing mechanism in F# that already lets you encode Haskell-style typeclasses and is the backbone of FSharpPlus, a typelevel (and more) library for F#. Solving constraints like this at compile-time (as opposed to having a runtime natively understand them) absolutely, positively leads to explosive compile times if you're not careful. I worked on the F# compiler for 5 years and I can attest to numerous reports related to accidental compile-time explosions just because SRTPs or inline was used a particular way.
-
Practically speaking, what does F#'s lack of higher-typed kinds mean?
F# devs tend to use SRTP (Statically resolved type parameters) see F#+ https://github.com/fsprojects/FSharpPlus .
-
F#+ 1.2 Released 🔷🚀
F#+ (FSharpPlus) 1.2 released with the following changes:
FStar
- Lean4 helped Terence Tao discover a small bug in his recent paper
-
The Deep Link Equating Math Proofs and Computer Programs
I don't think something that specific exists. There are a very large number of formal methods tools, each with different specialties / domains.
For verification with proof assistants, [Software Foundations](https://softwarefoundations.cis.upenn.edu/) and [Concrete Semantics](http://concrete-semantics.org/) are both solid.
For verification via model checking, you can check out [Learn TLA+](https://learntla.com/), and the more theoretical [Specifying Systems](https://lamport.azurewebsites.net/tla/book-02-08-08.pdf).
For more theory, check out [Formal Reasoning About Programs](http://adam.chlipala.net/frap/).
And for general projects look at [F*](https://www.fstar-lang.org/) and [Dafny](https://dafny.org/).
-
If You've Got Enough Money, It's All 'Lawful'
Don't get me wrong, there are times when Microsoft got it right the first time that was technically far superior to their competitors. Windows IOCP was theoretically capable of doing C10K as far back in 1994-95 when there wasn't any hardware support yet and UNIX world was bickering over how to do asynchronous I/O. Years later POSIX came up with select which was a shoddy little shit in comparison. Linux caved in finally only as recently as 2019 and implemented io_uring. Microsoft research has contributed some very interesting things to computer science like Z3 SAT solver and in collaboration with INRIA made languages like F* and Low* for formal specification and verification. But all this dwarfs in comparison to all the harm they did.
-
What are the current hot topics in type theory and static analysis?
Most of the proof assistants out there: Lean, Coq, Dafny, Isabelle, F*, Idris 2, and Agda. And the main concepts are dependent types, Homotopy Type Theory AKA HoTT, and Category Theory. Warning: HoTT and Category Theory are really dense, you're going to really need to research them.
-
Why is there no simple C-like functional programming language?
F* is a dependently typed language that can be transpiled to idiomatic C via the KReMLin compiler. It’s very ML-ish to write and you can leave out some proofs. It also has the benefit of being used to write a formally verified TLS implementation that’s in wide use throughout industry.
-
[Media] Genetic algorithm simulation - Smart rockets (code link in comments)
As I said, dependent types attempt to solve this problem. F* is a language where you can express complex logic as a type. The catch is, these types are checked by an SMT solver. If the solver can satisfy the type checking, then great, and you move on. If it can’t, you have no idea why, and either have to guess or manually write the proof anyway. Contrast this with Standard ML which has a proof of the soundness of its type system.
-
Prop v0.42 released! Don't panic! The answer is... support for dependent types :)
So kind of like F*? https://www.fstar-lang.org/
-
old languages compilers
F*
-
Pegasus spyware was used to hack reporters’ phones. I’m suing its creators; When you’re infected by Pegasus, spies effectively hold a clone of your phone – we’re fighting back.
Nevermind that academia has come up with far safer ways to do a few things but social norms & inertia prevent their wider adoption (well okay, it also has a barrier to entry in the education required to use it but I don't think someone with the knowledge to meaningfully contribute to an OS kernel can be considered uneducated nor unable to learn).
-
[Hobby] Amateur Generalist Programmer Seeking to Put Bugfixing Skills to Good Use
Maybe that's a little off topic here, but if you like fixing bugs, i suspect you might also enjoy showing that there are no bugs at all. Check out languages like F* https://www.fstar-lang.org/ It's a proof-oriented programming language. You can use it to write code that has no bugs at all. And you once you're done, can convert F* to C or other languages.
What are some alternatives?
language-ext - C# functional language extensions - a base class library for functional programming
coq - Coq is a formal proof management system. It provides a formal language to write mathematical definitions, executable algorithms and theorems together with an environment for semi-interactive development of machine-checked proofs.
aether - Optics for F#
lean - Lean Theorem Prover
fslang-suggestions - The place to make suggestions, discuss and vote on F# language and core library features
dafny - Dafny is a verification-aware programming language
hacn - A "monad" or DSL for creating React components using Fable and F# computation expressions
koka - Koka language compiler and interpreter
Mondocks - An alternative way to interact with MongoDB databases from F# that allows you to use mongo-idiomatic constructs
VisualFSharp - The F# compiler, F# core library, F# language service, and F# tooling integration for Visual Studio
stepmania - Advanced rhythm game for Windows, Linux and OS X. Designed for both home and arcade use.
SharpLab - .NET language playground