By: Tony Morris
Kevin, Using a web application as the example, write it in such a way as you can (aspire to) prove the sub-program. The “running forever” part becomes largely irrelevant.
View ArticleBy: Ivo
When people say “It’s not possible to write bug-free programs.”, I assume they really mean “In practice, in the languages we use, it turns out that I, and most other people — including known great...
View ArticleBy: Daniel Sobral
I’m with Kevin on this one. A bug is an undesirable behavior in a program. Not being correct qualifies as a bug, but by no means comprises it.
View ArticleBy: Andreas S.
Hi Tony! This somehow reminded me of this: http://james-iry.blogspot.com/2010/05/types-la-chart.html Where I really liked the diagram to visualize the different properties of programming languages in...
View ArticleClik here to view.
By: Gabriel C.
There’s a trend here: we discard untyped programs and we get less bugs, we discard uncontrolled mutation and we get less bugs, and now we discard uncontrolled recursion and we get less bugs. Maybe the...
View ArticleBy: Xamuel
A more obvious, and less controversial, example, would be your simple “Hello World!” program, which presumably can be programmed and then proven to be correct with little difficulty…
View ArticleBy: artem
rzezeski: guess what? There are bugs in Coq - for the curious, their bugzilla URL is below. However Coq has grown rather large and contains stuff far beyond what is strictly necessary for minimal...
View ArticleBy: ziggy
Interpreting (think misconstruing) informal statements like “It’s not possible to write bug-free programs.” in a formal way is a sure way to arrive at some counter-intuitive result. How about “It’s...
View ArticleBy: Tony Morris
When I see “It’s not possible to write bug-free programs”, it’s usually a deeply-held belief that projects as “I have a history of writing programs with bugs.” There isn’t any requirement to depend on...
View Article
