magmide VS csharplang

https://github.com/magmide/magmide when

How close are we to this https://github.com/magmide/magmide

https://github.com/magmide/magmide#isnt-most-software-too-fu...

I really want to like this, but it really comes across as more of a wishful thinking project without a lot of experience or intuition about how to solve the very real problems that formal methods run into in this domain. Like, the design goals literally include "verify any program" [1], which is almost certainly impossible.

Important questions like how you implement the design pillars without running smack into the issue of decidability seem entirely ignored. They have a whole section on how "this idea exists in an incentive no man's land" without seemingly being aware of the rich history of formal methods in low level programming, from Ada through Java through formal C through Rust itself. The common issues these encountered like decidability, holes in the formal model (which contributed to the downfall of the Java sandbox as a security boundary), and the combinatorial explosion inherent in verification tools are all huge looming questions that should at least be mentioned.

Maybe I'm being overly critical here, but it all makes me wonder whether the project is even possible.

[1] https://github.com/magmide/magmide/blob/main/posts/design-of...

I would love to play around with a compiled language with as powerful a compile-time type system/proof assistant as Lean or Coq. I saw some early work in the Rust realm here: https://github.com/magmide/magmide

The Magma name requires disambiguation:

His Magma programming language: https://github.com/blainehansen/magma

> The goal of this project is to: create a programming language and surrounding education/tooling ecosystem capable of making formal verification and provably correct software mainstream and normal among working software engineers.

Magma computer algebra system: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magma_(computer_algebra_system...

> Magma is a computer algebra system designed to solve problems in algebra, number theory, geometry and combinatorics. It is named after the algebraic structure magma. It runs on Unix-like operating systems, as well as Windows.

The current design thinking is spelled out in the repo: https://github.com/blainehansen/magma

The idea with notations isn't to make custom symbology impossible, just clearly signaled, much in the same way Rust macros can do whatever they want but have to be underneath some macro_name!esque indicator. Check out my rough design thoughts for more if you're interested :) https://github.com/blainehansen/magma/blob/main/posts/design-of-magma.md

Certain parts of Microsoft Learn are permissive, for example the .NET BCL documentation is Creative Commons Attribution: https://github.com/dotnet/dotnet-api-docs as is ASP.NET Core: https://github.com/dotnet/AspNetCore.Docs (a good hint if documentation is permissively licensed and on GitHub is if there's an edit button at the top.)

The C# language specification is unfortunately a bit fuzzier: https://github.com/dotnet/csharplang/discussions/4855

The updated unified C# language specification is CC, but it's still catching up to modern C#: https://github.com/dotnet/csharpstandard

No OP, but for example you still see the C# folks still struggling to add discriminated unions to the language because of complex interactions due to its too many features[1]. Virtual threads are easier to use than async/await is another example.

[1] https://github.com/dotnet/csharplang/issues/113

Hi there. I'm the language designer who created the 'Collection Expression' design/specification: https://github.com/dotnet/csharplang/issues/5354

You can see the entire history of the proposal there. To answer you specific question, we went with `..` because that's what the language already uses for the complimentary 'pattern matching deconstruction' form for collection patterns.

In other words, you can already say this today:

    if (x is [var start, .. var middle, .. var end]) { ... }

Great improvements.

There is PolySharp project that enables you to use most of C#11 features in legacy .NET Framework: https://github.com/Sergio0694/PolySharp - Seems that C#12 features are planned to be implemented: https://github.com/Sergio0694/PolySharp/issues/78

I'm using PolySharp where I'm stuck with .NET Framework 4.6 and I don't have any issues.

Hope one day I'd see concise syntax for catch and/or try expressions: https://github.com/dotnet/csharplang/discussions/2734 - but there is a lot of resistance.

You must specify concrete type.

There was a plan to have "natural type" so "var list = [1,2,3]" would be of type "List" but it was postponed to C# 13 (https://github.com/dotnet/csharplang/issues/5354#issuecommen...)

While C# currently lacks direct support for this kind of functionality, there's a glimmer of hope with an active proposal under discussion that aims to bring this feature to the language. This potential addition promises a future where C# can natively offer similar robust type narrowing.

Given few people anticipated ValueTuple and C# adding a more direct tuple syntax, I feel like it is only a matter of time before C# adds discriminated unions.

(There are multiple proposals tracking the idea. This seems the most comprehensive and "central": https://github.com/dotnet/csharplang/issues/7016)

https://github.com/dotnet/csharplang/issues/7009

[Proposal]: Interceptors #7009

> An interceptor is a method which can declaratively substitute a call to itself instead of a call to an interceptable method at compile time. This substitution occurs by having the interceptor declare the source locations of the calls that it intercepts. This provides a limited facility to change the semantics of existing code by adding new code to a compilation (e.g. in a source generator).

[2]: https://github.com/dotnet/csharplang/blob/main/proposals/csh...