Recent submissions

Comment · 18 days ago
Moreover, Litex aims for more than simpler syntax, it wants to align formal code semantics to daily math: for example, in lean, 1 / 0 returns 0, (1 : Nat) - 2 returns 0. These are very strange to normal people. Litex tries to eliminate the gap between formal code and "real math".
Comment · 18 days ago
Comment · 10 months ago
It's truely great if Litex does compile to existing formal languages. The only problem is that we can not find a good way to compile our verification process, which does not require users to give names to facts they are using and thus very different from how Lean works, to Lean (set theory example is just the first one of a series of comparisons). Besides, it's even harder to compile future functionaliteies, like printing out results of each statement of litex in a human readable way, to lean. So since litex is still a young language and we are using our limited resources to try new ideas and crack here and there, for the time being we believe it's not a good time to migrate our code in such a great scale. Thank you. Merry Christmas.
Comment · 10 months ago
Thanks! It seems the font color defers in different systems (I did not find this behavior on my machine). So I changed the font color to pink :)

Happy Christmas

Comment · 10 months ago
[Litex](https://litexlang.com) is a simple open-source computer language for mathematical proofs. Anyone can have a rough understanding of Litex in 2 hours.

Although it is not yet ready for production use, it is already powerful enough to formalize set theory and basic logic, which is enough for most daily mathematical proofs. Visit [Set Theory Examples](https://litexlang.com/doc/How_Litex_Works/Litex_vs_Lean_Set_...) for more examples.

Star the repo [here](https://github.com/litexlang/golitex) to support Litex, and join our [Zulip community](https://litex.zulipchat.com/join/c4e7foogy6paz2sghjnbujov/) to give us feedback and suggestions!

Comment · 1 year ago
Thank you auggierose. Your comment is by far the best description of the stage of Litex is now: very flawed, but very different from other formal languages. I guess it is because Litex is closer to reasoning (or math in general) rather than to programming.
Comment · 1 year ago
haha, no, it is not. visit my git commits and you can see the readme has been updated ~1000 times! I really want my readme look good!
Comment · 1 year ago
Working on that bro :)
Comment · 1 year ago
Thank you aktuel!
Comment · 1 year ago
know @self_defined_axiom_larger_equal_is_transitive(x, y, z R): x >= y y >= z =>: x >= z

Since transitivity of >= is not implemented, one has to call this self_defined_axiom_larger_equal_is_transitive to make x >= 17 here, so

``` know forall x N: x >= 47 => x >= 17 ```

is essential

Comment · 1 year ago
The first line is essential, because Litex does not implement transitivity of >= in its kernel and one has to formalize it: know @larger_equal_is_transitive(x, y, z R): x >= y y >= z
Comment · 1 year ago
HAHA, thank you fallat, I guess you are right!

Live from the official Hacker News API

A modern reader for Hacker News · SvelteKit + Skeleton