> The field in question is formal verification. It’s notable that those two words appear nowhere on Bend’s webpage or in its codebase. The developer has built an entire language around a field seemingly without realising that said field exists.
I checked the developer's X account, they have written numerous posts about formal verification, so this specific claim ("without realising that said field exists") seems to be false.
Bend's developer has posted a well-argued response here: <a href="https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49753898">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49753898
I am glad I saw it, as now I am interested in learning more about Bend.
z7 · · focus · HN ↗
I checked the developer's X account, they have written numerous posts about formal verification, so this specific claim ("without realising that said field exists") seems to be false.
mannykannot · · focus · HN ↗
I am glad I saw it, as now I am interested in learning more about Bend.