Coming Soon: Machine-Checked Proofs in Everyday Development
Mathematical proofs of code are not suitable for most systems.<p>Even unit tests which don&#x27;t involve proofs can be a problem sometimes because they lock down API inputs and outputs. It&#x27;s already a major problem when a developer wants to change some code and they have to spend hours updating unit tests every time. When in small teams, heavy 100% coverage unit tests slow down productivity, possibly by 5x or 10x.<p>I imagine that adding proofs as part of the unit test suite would further increase the productivity cost overhead by a massive factor.<p>In software development, you should avoid treating the code like if it&#x27;s special or perfect because it&#x27;s not and it will need to be changed in the near future when requirements change (and they will always keep changing). So locking it down into a specific state with proofs all around it is a bad idea for the vast, vast majority of cases.<p>We need more wisdom in software development and that means taking a step back, looking at the big picture and asking questions like what are the negative side effects of each new methodology that we are introducing into our projects? There are always downsides, and we&#x27;re crazy to pretend that every fancy new methodology is a silver bullet.