From: Christopher L Conway <cconway@cs.nyu.edu>
To: caml-list@inria.fr
Subject: Re: [OSR] Standard syntax extensions ?
Date: Sun, 27 Apr 2008 14:14:37 +0000 (UTC) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <loom.20080427T140420-728@post.gmane.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <48142430.9000705@andrej.com>
Andrej Bauer <Andrej.Bauer <at> andrej.com> writes:
> Arthur Chan wrote:
> > That
> > said, there are some of us who feel that that the python infix syntax is
> > clearer, and as it corresponds more directly to the mathematical
> > notation, it is just as provably correct as the List.mem notation is.
> > If reusing "in" is a big deal, then maybe we could do "in_list" or
> > "inlist"? That'd be more type-safe too.
>
> Just a small correction, if you will alow me. When we speak of
> correctness of a programming language we do not say that "syntax is
> provably correct" but rather that the "implementation is correct".
I think what Arthur meant by "provably correct" was "has well-defined semantics,
aiding proofs of correctness."
> Actually, the whole phrase "provably correct" is often misused in
> computer science, at least the way I understand it. If you prove
> something then it is "proved correct", while a thing is "provably
> correct" if we _could_ prove it correct. Perhaps a native speaker of
> English can clarify this point.
You have a point, from a prescriptive point of view. But in the common usage
"provable" and "proved" are sometimes interchanged. Most computer scientists
aren't Platonists: "provable" means "I could describe the proof for you, step by
step, if you like, but let's save some time by skipping it." Saying a claim is
"provable" without working out the proof begs the question.
> Isn't everything on this list a minor quibble?
Happy quibbling,
Chris
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-04-27 14:20 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 29+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-04-24 15:49 David Teller
2008-04-24 15:52 ` [Caml-list] " John Whitington
2008-04-25 8:22 ` Richard Jones
2008-05-01 7:45 ` Richard Jones
2008-04-24 16:16 ` [Caml-list] [OSR] Standard syntax extensions ? - voting Stefano Zacchiroli
2008-04-25 15:15 ` David Teller
2008-04-26 0:16 ` Stefano Zacchiroli
2008-04-24 16:41 ` [Caml-list] [OSR] Standard syntax extensions ? Martin Jambon
2008-04-24 17:02 ` Jon Harrop
2008-04-24 20:53 ` Berke Durak
2008-04-25 8:24 ` Richard Jones
2008-04-25 16:59 ` Berke Durak
2008-04-25 17:31 ` Gerd Stolpmann
2008-04-25 17:38 ` Richard Jones
2008-04-25 10:33 ` Andrej Bauer
2008-04-25 15:32 ` David Teller
2008-04-24 17:05 ` Dario Teixeira
2008-04-25 13:57 ` Peng Zang
2008-04-25 15:04 ` David Teller
2008-04-25 16:11 ` Peng Zang
2008-04-25 20:37 ` Arthur Chan
2008-04-26 7:41 ` Richard Jones
2008-04-26 7:53 ` Till Crueger
2008-04-26 21:32 ` Arthur Chan
2008-04-27 6:58 ` Andrej Bauer
2008-04-27 14:14 ` Christopher L Conway [this message]
2008-04-27 17:41 ` David Teller
2008-04-27 17:44 ` David Teller
2008-04-25 22:25 ` Mike Lin
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=loom.20080427T140420-728@post.gmane.org \
--to=cconway@cs.nyu.edu \
--cc=caml-list@inria.fr \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).