
The Little Prover - nickmain
http://mitpress.mit.edu/books/little-prover
======
drcode
I've had the pleasure of reading a pre-release version of this book and
enjoyed it immensely [1]. Yes, it's true most of us will probably never need
to write mathematically-provable software [2] but it's still good to know WHY
we don't do this for our day-to-day programming, by getting a feel for just
how challenging it is to do this.

However, I'm no expert on writing provably-true software, so take my opinion
with a grain of salt... you may want to wait for reviews from experts in this
field who can compare this book to other alternatives.

[1] Note that the "Little X" series of books have a peculiar style and may not
be to everyone's taste. I'm speaking as someone who enjoyed all of the
previous books in this series immensely.

[2] Although programmatic proofs may start becoming more mainstream in the
future: For instance, with "smart contracts" they may play a major role, and
are already planned as a feature for the ethereum solidity smart contract
language... Not surprisingly, if you are handling currency in a contract,
people like to know things like "There is no scenario in which the other party
can run away with all my money".

------
JadeNB
It looks like it's an introduction to by-hand proofs about software, rather
than to software-assisted proofs. That's a shame—I got very excited at the
thought of a 'Little X' take on proof assistants!

~~~
WaxProlix
My girlfriend and I are starting to play around with proof assistants
(avoiding the coq joke as best I can...) and it would be great to have
something like this to go along with that endeavour.

~~~
pykello
Which proof assistants did you play with? Why are avoiding coq?

~~~
JadeNB
I think WaxProlix
([https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9553471](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9553471))
was avoiding puerile jokes _about_ (a homonym for) Coq, not avoiding Coq
itself.

~~~
WaxProlix
Yes, exactly, especially in the context of "my girlfriend and I", "playing
with", etc. Low-(brow|hanging fruit), even for me.

------
pykello
Reading this news while self-studying and enjoying the "Software Foundations"
[1] course is so sweet.

[1]
[http://www.seas.upenn.edu/~cis500/current/index.html](http://www.seas.upenn.edu/~cis500/current/index.html)

------
pkrumins
Omg omg omg. I haven't been this excited about a book release for a long time.
I just preordered this book. I can't wait to go through it cover to cover.

------
eli_gottlieb
Oh hey, they're writing a PLT Group rival to _Software Foundations_ and
_Certified Programming with Dependent Types_.

------
surganov
To me it's like Star Wars VII.

------
sriram_sun
I worked out every problem in The Little Schemer back in 2000 with only a C++
programming and no computer science background. It was very approachable and
my only source of joy in a nightmarish academic setting.

I am looking forward to this book with the same degree of enthusiasm :)!

------
davexunit
I know nothing about the subject, but I love this series. Going to drop by MIT
Press when I get the chance and pick it up.

~~~
tjr
Note the target release is in July, lest you be disappointed this weekend. Not
that the MIT Press shop could actually be disappointing...

~~~
davexunit
Thanks for sparing me from being dumb and going into the store tonight.

------
psibi
Can I see the table of contents anywhere ?

------
picardo
Is there an ebook version somewhere?

