Kinda supports my long held belief that the idea that mathematical proofs can be used as a substitute for, or as a way to reduce the need for, the conventional testing and analysis of computer programs, is pretty much foundationless.
The problem with mathemeatical proofs is that not only do experts make mistakes when writing them, but other experts make mistakes when verifying them. And there are no methods available for proving proofs, beyond expert review.
Which somewhat makes a mockery of the idea that you can achieve "provably correct programs" by compiling them directly from mathematical proof notations.
Examine what is said, not who speaks -- Silence betokens consent -- Love the truth but pardon error.
"Science is about questioning the status quo. Questioning authority".
In the absence of evidence, opinion is indistinguishable from prejudice.
| [reply] |
| [reply] |
