The Science of Programming

This record preserves its author, date and source link. Open HN to read the full context.

This record preserves its author, date and source link. Open HN to read the full context.

This record preserves its author, date and source link. Open HN to read the full context.

This record preserves its author, date and source link. Open HN to read the full context.

This record preserves its author, date and source link. Open HN to read the full context.

This record preserves its author, date and source link. Open HN to read the full context.

This record preserves its author, date and source link. Open HN to read the full context.

This record preserves its author, date and source link. Open HN to read the full context.

This record preserves its author, date and source link. Open HN to read the full context.

This record preserves its author, date and source link. Open HN to read the full context.

This record preserves its author, date and source link. Open HN to read the full context.

This record preserves its author, date and source link. Open HN to read the full context.

This record preserves its author, date and source link. Open HN to read the full context.

…almost always makes for an interesting read, cf. Niklaus Wirth: "Good ideas through the looking glass".) [ 1 ]: Interested readers might want to check out the excellent "The Science of Programming" by David Gries.

… properties. and last but not least, while i think that axiomatic semantics are important, i think it is almost always too time consuming to write hoare triples. i have "the science of programming" by david gries, which should help my incompetent brain to speed up here, but the truth is: it's non-trivial for many programs. this is why i feel that many things are going the "interactive theorem proving"-way. this sums it up pretty much for me. please note that i am not an expert on these issues--though very interested. axiomatic semantics and interactive theorem proving as mentioned above are not mutually exclusive, i.e., i think that one should very well be able to ensure correctness via hoare triples proven in interactive theorem provers.