Anonymous user
Talk:Proof: Difference between revisions
→Draft status: re
(→Draft status: re) |
|||
Line 148:
: Apart from the small additional subtask, I don't think this task has been changed in any essential way since [http://rosettacode.org/mw/index.php?title=Proof&oldid=11669 2007]. —''[[User:Ruud Koot|Ruud]]'' 18:09, 12 May 2012 (UTC)
:: Wrong. It's full of additional restrictions. In [http://rosettacode.org/mw/index.php?title=Proof&oldid=102003 2011] even, it said nothing about dependent types. These new restrictions are approaching a task description that says something like "languages must have built-in support for at least one of (loosely related) features x, y or z. all others must omit." But the task isn't clear yet on what those features are. —[[User:Sonia|Sonia]] 18:39, 12 May 2012 (UTC)
::: I think it was as clear in 2007 what this task was supposed to be about as it is now ''to someone who has had some previous exposure to proof assistants''. The only problem here is effectively communicating this to programmers who do not have such a background. The letter of task description might have changed a bit, but its spirit certainly hasn't.
::: One of the problem with stating the description precisely is exactly because it should ''not'' exclude solutions in HOL or Isabelle (they are not based on dependent types) or perhaps even a very creative solution using C++ template programming. —''[[User:Ruud Koot|Ruud]]'' 18:49, 12 May 2012 (UTC)
== Haskell ==
| |||