coq
Agda
Our great sponsors
coq | Agda | |
---|---|---|
87 | 27 | |
4,578 | 2,363 | |
1.6% | 3.3% | |
10.0 | 9.8 | |
3 days ago | 1 day ago | |
OCaml | Haskell | |
GNU Lesser General Public License v3.0 only | GNU General Public License v3.0 or later |
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.
coq
-
Change of Name: Coq –> The Rocq Prover
The page summarizing the considered new names and their pros/cons is interesting: https://github.com/coq/coq/wiki/Alternative-names
Naming is hard...
-
The First Stable Release of a Rust-Rewrite Sudo Implementation
Are those more important than, say:
- Proven with Coq, a formal proof management system: https://coq.inria.fr/
See in the real world: https://aws.amazon.com/security/provable-security/
And check out Computer-Aided Verification (CAV).
-
In Which I Claim Rich Hickey Is Wrong
Dafny and Whiley are two examples with explicit verification support. Idris and other dependently typed languages should all be rich enough to express the required predicate but might not necessarily be able to accept a reasonable implementation as proof. Isabelle, Lean, Coq, and other theorem provers definitely can express the capability but aren't going to churn out much in the way of executable programs; they're more useful to guide an implementation in a more practical functional language but then the proof is separated from the implementation, and you could also use tools like TLA+.
-
If given a list of properties/definitions and relationship between them, could a machine come up with (mostly senseless, but) true implications?
Still, there are many useful tools based on these ideas, used by programmers and mathematicians alike. What you describe sounds rather like Datalog (e.g. Soufflé Datalog), where you supply some rules and an initial fact, and the system repeatedly expands out the set of facts until nothing new can be derived. (This has to be finite, if you want to get anywhere.) In Prolog (e.g. SWI Prolog) you also supply a set of rules and facts, but instead of a fact as your starting point, you give a query containing some unknown variables, and the system tries to find an assignment of the variables that proves the query. And finally there is a rich array of theorem provers and proof assistants such as Agda, Coq, Lean, and Twelf, which can all be used to help check your reasoning or explore new ideas.
-
Functional Programming in Coq
What ever happened to the effort [1] to rename Coq in order to make it less offensive? There were a number of excellent proposals [2] that seemed to die on the vine.
[1] https://github.com/coq/coq/wiki/Alternative-names
[2] https://github.com/coq/coq/wiki/Alternative-names#c%E1%B5%A3...
-
Mark Petruska has requested 250000 Algos for the development of a Coq-avm library for AVM version 8
Information about the Coq proof assistant: https://coq.inria.fr/ , https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coq
-
Basic SAT model of x86 instructions using Z3, autogenerated from Intel docs
This type of thing can help you formally verify code.
So, if your proof is correct, and your description of the (language/CPU) is correct, you can prove the code does what you think it does.
Formal proof systems are still growing up, though, and they are still pretty hard to use. See Coq for an introduction: https://coq.inria.fr/
-
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.
- The seven programming ur-languages
- Rosenpass – formally verified post-quantum WireGuard
Agda
-
If given a list of properties/definitions and relationship between them, could a machine come up with (mostly senseless, but) true implications?
Still, there are many useful tools based on these ideas, used by programmers and mathematicians alike. What you describe sounds rather like Datalog (e.g. Soufflé Datalog), where you supply some rules and an initial fact, and the system repeatedly expands out the set of facts until nothing new can be derived. (This has to be finite, if you want to get anywhere.) In Prolog (e.g. SWI Prolog) you also supply a set of rules and facts, but instead of a fact as your starting point, you give a query containing some unknown variables, and the system tries to find an assignment of the variables that proves the query. And finally there is a rich array of theorem provers and proof assistants such as Agda, Coq, Lean, and Twelf, which can all be used to help check your reasoning or explore new ideas.
-
What can Category Theory do?
Haskell and Agda are probably the most obvious examples. Ocaml too, but it is much older, so its type system is not as categorical. There is also Idris, which is not as well-known but is very cool.
-
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.
-
Amendmend proposal: Changed syntax for Or patterns
Does this come with plans to separately unify the body with each of the contexts induced by matching on each of the respective patterns (similar to what’s discussed here), or will it behave like the _ pattern and use only the most general context?
- Doom emacs and agda-mode
-
Best Programming Language for Computational Proof
Coq, Agda, Lean, Isabelle, and probably some others which are not coming to my mind at the moment, but those would be considered the major ones.
-
Do you use Idris or Coq, and why?
Funny that you say this, because there are some obvious long standing open feature requests with looking up the type of the term under cursor — № 4295 and № 516. I am not blaming anyone in particular — this is the way it is. I wish I could find time to rewrite the proof search engine (how hard can it be), but I am already buried under a pile of other commitments and a good chunk of overwhelming sadness.
-
Haskell is the greatest programming language of all time ... the rational adult in a room full of children ... When I program in Haskell, I am in utopia. I am in a different world than 99.9% of what I see posted on Reddit.
"Haskal is a mess, that's why I use a language that's written with Haskal."
-
The comment with the most upvotes decides what language I write my finals in this year will be.
Do it in Agda.
-
Wren is a small, fast, class-based concurrent scripting language
Agda is fun[1]. And there's also Idris[2] - more programming language, less proof assistant.
[1] https://wiki.portal.chalmers.se/agda/pmwiki.php https://github.com/agda/agda
What are some alternatives?
lean - Lean Theorem Prover
coc.nvim - Nodejs extension host for vim & neovim, load extensions like VSCode and host language servers.
kok.nvim - Fast as FUCK nvim completion. SQLite, concurrent scheduler, hundreds of hours of optimization.
FStar - A Proof-oriented Programming Language
open-typerep - Open type representations and dynamic types
HoleyMonoid - Automatically exported from code.google.com/p/monoid-cont
lean4 - Lean 4 programming language and theorem prover
tlaplus - TLC is a model checker for specifications written in TLA+. The TLA+Toolbox is an IDE for TLA+.
coq.vim - Pathogen-compatible distribution of Vicent Aravantinos' vim scripts for Coq.
zig - General-purpose programming language and toolchain for maintaining robust, optimal, and reusable software.
distributive - Dual Traversable
coq-serapi - Coq Protocol Playground with Se(xp)rialization of Internal Structures.