tlaplus
dafny
Our great sponsors
tlaplus | dafny | |
---|---|---|
38 | 30 | |
2,197 | 2,659 | |
1.0% | 1.3% | |
9.1 | 9.7 | |
8 days ago | 3 days ago | |
Java | C# | |
MIT License | 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.
tlaplus
- Ask HN: Usefulness of formal verification (Coq) and formal verification (TLA+)?
-
Quint: A specification language based on the temporal logic of actions (TLA)
```
https://github.com/tlaplus/tlaplus/blob/master/tlatools/org....
In any case, our whole team thinks TLA is great, and we're happy people like you and Ron find it so useful and insightful. We also think it is a very insightful.
-
Concurrent Data-structure Design Walk-Through
There are no tests! There are various ways to test concurrent data structures. You could use a stress test, where you spawn a lot of threads and let them mutate the map in a random way and then check the consistency of the map and some invariants. You could learn TLA+ and write a formal model of the map and then verify it.
-
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+.
-
Programming Languages Going Above and Beyond
I wish something like Lamport's TLA+ (https://lamport.azurewebsites.net/tla/tla.html) was supported in modern language compilers - perhaps with annotations/macros and a mini formal DSL.
- Ask HN: How you understand TLA+ and how you use TLA+ in your projects?
-
A collection of lock-free data structures written in standard C++11
Checking the invariant with assert is also useful in my limited experience with concurrency.
- Ask HN: Is writing a math proof like programming without ever running your code?
-
What I've Learned About Formal Methods in Half a Year
One advantage of formal methods is in determining "what was expected" (including all the goofy edge cases) without having to burrow into the details of code.
Take a look at Alloy (http://alloytools.org/) and TLA+ (https://lamport.azurewebsites.net/tla/tla.html) for example. (Or even the ancient Z ("Zed") notation (https://www.cs.cmu.edu/~15819/zedbook.pdf)).
-
How do I get the set of process identifier of PlusCal?
The pcal generator does *not* generate a definition for the set of labels. However, some users have suggested to add such a feature: https://github.com/tlaplus/tlaplus/issues/613
dafny
- Candy – a minimalistic functional programming language
- Dafny – a verification-aware programming language
-
Lean4 helped Terence Tao discover a small bug in his recent paper
Code correctness is a lost art. I requirement to think in abstractions is what scares a lot of devs to avoid it. The higher abstraction language (formal specs) focus on a dedicated language to describe code, whereas lower abstractions (code contracts) basically replace validation logic with a better model.
C# once had Code Contracts[1]; a simple yet powerful way to make formal specifications. The contracts was checked at compile time using the Z3 SMT solver[2]. It was unfortunately deprecated after a few years[3] and once removed from the .NET Runtime it was declared dead.
The closest thing C# now have is probably Dafny[4] while the C# dev guys still try to figure out how to implement it directly in the language[5].
[1] https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/research/project/code-contra...
[2] https://github.com/Z3Prover/z3
[3] https://github.com/microsoft/CodeContracts
-
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/).
- Dafny
- The Dafny Programming and Verification Language
-
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+.
-
Programming Languages Going Above and Beyond
> I think we can assume it won't be as efficient has hand written code
Actually, surprisingly, not necessarily the case!
If you'll refer to the discussion in https://github.com/dafny-lang/dafny/issues/601 and in https://github.com/dafny-lang/dafny/issues/547, Dafny can statically prove that certain compiler branches are not possible and will never be taken (such as out-of-bounds on index access, logical assumptions about whether a value is greater than or less than some other value, etc). This lets you code in the assumptions (__assume in C++ or unreachable_unchecked() under rust) that will allow the compiler to optimize the codegen using this information.
-
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.
-
What I've Learned About Formal Methods in Half a Year
I'm not sure if the author is here, or if my comment attempt was successful. So, can I suggest you take a look at a third leg of the formal methods stool?
If you are familiar with C, check out Frama-C (https://frama-c.com/) and the WP and RTE plugins. The approach is based on Tony Hoare and EWD's axiomatic semantics (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hoare_logic). It does not have a good memory management story, as far as I know, but is very good for demonstrating value correctness (RTE automatically generates assertions for numeric runtime errors, for example) and many memory errors.
If you are familiar with Ada, check out SPARK (https://www.adacore.com/about-spark), which is similar to Frama-C but has a much better interface in the AdaCore GNAT toolkit and IDE.
Both work similarly: Assertions in normal Ada or C code as well as the code itself are translated into SMT statements and fed to a SMT solver to find counterexamples---errors.
I have some blog posts from several years ago about Frama-C:https://maniagnosis.crsr.net/tags/applied%20formal%20logic.h... (And I really should get back into it; it's a lot of fun.)
If you are not familiar with Ada or C, Dafny (https://dafny.org/) is another option based on .NET and devoleped at Microsoft. It seems nigh-on perfect for this approach. (The language uses a garbage collector.) At the time I was looking, there was little documentation on Dafny, but that seems to have improved.
What are some alternatives?
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.
FStar - A Proof-oriented Programming Language
apalache - APALACHE: symbolic model checker for TLA+ and Quint
rust - Rust for the xtensa architecture. Built in targets for the ESP32 and ESP8266
stateright - A model checker for implementing distributed systems.
koka - Koka language compiler and interpreter
awesome-programming-languages - The list of an awesome programming languages that you might be interested in
Rust-for-Linux - Adding support for the Rust language to the Linux kernel.
Corinna - Corinna - Bring Modern OO to the Core of Perl
interactive - .NET Interactive combines the power of .NET with many other languages to create notebooks, REPLs, and embedded coding experiences. Share code, explore data, write, and learn across your apps in ways you couldn't before.
adventofcode - Advent of Code solutions of 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018, 2019, 2020, 2021, 2022 and 2023 in Scala
rust - Empowering everyone to build reliable and efficient software.