Followup on the above with these two classics;

Retrospective: An Axiomatic Basis For Computer Programming. This was written 30 years after An Axiomatic Basis for Computer Programming to take stock on what was proven right and what was proven wrong - https://cacm.acm.org/opinion/retrospective-an-axiomatic-basi...

How Did Software Get So Reliable Without Proof? More detailed paper on the above theme (pdf) - https://6826.csail.mit.edu/2020/papers/noproof.pdf

▲

ontouchstart 5 hours ago | parent [-]

Thanks for the recommendation. I downloaded both social.pdf and noproof.pdf on my Kindle Scribe to read them carefully and revisited the discussions on EWD638 and EWD692.

It is very interesting to see how Sir Tony diverged from EDW: one is right in theoretical sense but cynical about human fallacies and how the society is heading towards more wasteful complexity, one is to live with it and stay optimistic.

There is a proverb in Chinese Taoism:

小隱隱於野，大隱隱於市

A small recluse hides in the wild, while a great recluse hides in the city

	▲	rramadass 2 hours ago \| parent [-]
		Nice comparison of Hoare vs. Dijkstra. Hoare was more focused and diplomatic while Dijkstra was more of a free-ranging philosopher. I still remember the first time i came across Hoare Logic/Triple and Dijkstra's GCL/Weakest precondition, understanding nothing and feeling like a complete dolt. As a young'un i thought knowing the syntax of a language and learning some idioms/patterns was all you needed for programming. Reading Hoare/Dijkstra showed me where mathematical theory met programming practice.