> but since we don't write code like that people can't get to it easily
which likely sums up what Lamport is trying to get across - express your work equationally, determine properties and generally understand what you're dealing with and then later, you can 'compile your equations' down to a particular implementation.
from my own practice, i've found that it is much easier to reason about equations and reflect it down into code than to try and reason about the code
which likely sums up what Lamport is trying to get across - express your work equationally, determine properties and generally understand what you're dealing with and then later, you can 'compile your equations' down to a particular implementation. from my own practice, i've found that it is much easier to reason about equations and reflect it down into code than to try and reason about the code