[maxwells-daemon]

We are! We very recently announced some results on formally proving the correctness of programs: https://harmonic.fun/news#blog-post-verina-bench-sota

Formal methods are cool because, by contrast to tools like the borrow checker, you can prove some very "nonlocal" properties: this system does not deadlock, or it makes progress at least every N steps, etc.

[vatsachak]

Does Aristotle produce TLA+ output?

For example can it read rust async code and prove that there are no deadlocks in TLA+, or some equivalent in Lean?

[zozbot234]

TLA+ is generally used to specify a "toy model" of some complex distributed system. It's not intended for end-to-end proof, for that you'd just use Coq/Rocq or Lean itself. Lean is certainly expressive enough, but you'll have to translate the time and non-determinism modalities of TLA+ as part of the Lean development.

[NetMageSCW]

How is “this system doesn’t deadlock” not the same as the halting problem?

[xjm]

Proving that a particular program terminates does not require deciding the halting problem on arbitrary programs (same for deadlock freedom)

[pvillano]

Deadlock is literally a halting problem.

We can't know for every possible program if it halts or not, but the complexity of programs we can determine is increasing as tools and techniques get better