Home page logo

fulldisclosure logo Full Disclosure mailing list archives

Re: proving _anything_ in the Coq proof assistant (in addition to code execution). ``coqchk'' passes too
From: Georgi Guninski <guninski () guninski com>
Date: Wed, 4 May 2011 12:49:16 +0300

On Tue, May 03, 2011 at 04:27:29PM +0300, Georgi Guninski wrote:

what about this scenario, is it reallistic:

i claim i have a proof of X. the proof is thousands of files. 
lambda.v is the plugin and coqc is invoked on only top.v ?

if i read the fine manual, i would have saved myself the ocaml troubles

  Theorem really: True = False.
    external "/bin/sh" "ESCAPE_SEQ; write_vo_proof; nicely_kill_coq ;" True.
    (* this invokes /bin/sh. suited for formal software verification *)

Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html
Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/

  By Date           By Thread  

Current thread:
[ Nmap | Sec Tools | Mailing Lists | Site News | About/Contact | Advertising | Privacy ]