I'm trying to learn to use Isabelle/HOL. I thought, "Hey, a tutorial written by some of the folks who developed it would be great", and so looked at
https://isabelle.in.tum.de/doc/tutorial.pdf
which has a publication date of Aug 15, 2018. In trying to work through examples, though, I find things like this in the text:
"The classic Isabelle user interface is Proof General / Emacs by David Aspinall’s. This book says very little about Proof General, which has its own documentation." (page iii)
"If anything strange happens, we recommend that you ask Isabelle to display all type information via the Proof General menu item Isabelle > Settings > Show Types (see Sect. 1.5 for details)." (page 5)
The problem is that Proof General appears to no longer work with Isabelle (see Isabelle2016 and Proof General). I'm baffled on why a tutorial would base itself on out-of-date software, but my real question is this:
"Is there somewhere that I can learn to do even the simplest things in Isabelle 2017?"
As of 2018, the only IDE that is supported for Isabelle is Isabelle/jEdit, which is included in the distribution you can download from the Isabelle website. There is an experimental VSCode plugin that is under active development, but I would recommend using Isabelle/jEdit for the time being.
The tutorial you found is listed on the website as one of the ‘Old Manuals’. It is severely outdated in many respects and should not be used anymore. The publication date is probably meaningless since it is the date of when the PDF was generated, not when the text was written. Some people have lobbied to have that tutorial removed from the website entirely, and your experience seems to confirm that we should indeed do that.
One of the best ways to start learning Isabelle is probably the book ‘Concrete Semantics’ (free online version available). Its first half is basically an introduction to Isabelle/HOL with lots of exercises. There is also the ‘Programming and Proving’ tutorial on the Isabelle website, which is almost identical to the first half of ‘Concrete Semantics’.
However, it focuses on applications in computer science (semantics of programming languages and a bit of functional programming). I'm not sure if there is a good tutorial about how to do mathematics in Isabelle; in any case, mathematics tends to be more difficult to do in a theorem prover for beginners because the gap to informal paper reasoning is larger. So I recommend ‘Concrete Semantics’ even if you are ultimately interested in formalising mathematics.
By the way: You mentioned Isabelle2017, but there really is no reason to use that instead of Isabelle2018, which is the most recent version at the time of writing this answer.
Related
I'm interested in automata theory to improve my understanding of programming and compiler design (I would like to create some simple syntax's in my own projects , for example; L-Systems, AI, neural net structures and intelligent object-object conversation 'AI dialog') but there are things I need to learn before I go forward.
There are a lot of new symbols and mathematical concepts I need to learn before studying automata theory, I could not copy and paste examples because of the symbols and
I don't have the required reputation to post an image so hears a link to a wiki article.
Context-free grammar article on Wikipedia
Under the heading "Proper CFGs" you can see some definitions. I don't understand them.
Could someone please tell me what this notation is called so I can Google it. Any other pointers or information would also be helpful but just knowing a few key words will help. Also if anyone knows of a comprehensive resource that can be accessed for free e.g, an IIT Video lecture on the subject of that notation I would be eternally grateful as I
can't afford tutoring or even text books at this time.
The resource I'm using at the moment for automata theory(for anyone who is interested) is Theory of Automata IIT Lectures on YouTube.
The symbols ∀ and ∃ are logical quantifiers, respectively meaning "for all" and "there exists".
Typically you are first introduced to them in a discrete mathematics course, though they're a part of predicate logic (also known as first-order logic); in my particular university's CS program, Discrete Math is a pre-requisite for Logic for Computer Science, which in turn is a pre-requisite for Formal Languages and Automata.
The star * symbol in the term (V union Sigma)* there is studied in formal languages/automata theory itself: it is the Kleene star operator. Its input is an alphabet (a set of symbols), and it produces the set of all strings of zero or more symbols over that alphabet.
A useful tool for studying formal languages and automata is JFLAP.
This topic, at the level that you have referred to in your link, is really only for mathematicians or graduate-level theoretical computer science students. The symbols you are referring to are just symbolic logic. If you are really interested in automata theory, I would recommend trying to find resources that explore the topic from a conceptual level and avoid using complex logical statements. OR, if you really want to dive in, you can teach yourself symbolic logic, some set theory, probably some modern algebra, and then tackle automata theory from there.
I read many books on the subject of Languages and Automata, including the Dragon books on compilers (and the much more pragmatic Jack Crenshaw's Let's Write a Compiler), but none of it really clicked until I read the classic Finite and Infinite Machines by Marvin Minsky. Being an old book, it does not cover the latest research and developments in the field at all, but he explains the state-of-the-art for the 1960s in Automata, Neural Networks, Turing Machines, Functional Programming and Lambda Calculus, and the oft-neglected third wheel of String-Rewriting Systems. And the writing is exceptionally excellent and engaging. IIRC Minksy even co-authored a robot story with Isaac Asimov, so he has some serious writing credentials.
Like I say, this book will not bring you up-to-date in any of these fields, but it's the best book I've found for explaining everything from the ground up. And it would provide a very firm basis for reading anything more recent. This book is in the bibliography of every book published since.
I have been programming in a "learn-by-doing" fashion for almost 2 years now and I consider myself fairly good however, I really wish to build a good foundation of Computer Science/Computer Engineering and most people recommend I start off with SICP. (Structure and Interpretation of Computer Programs)
I wished to know
Is this the best way to go about it?
I know how to code a matrix-multiplication in OpenMP and MPI and I know college level math, is this sufficient to read and appreciate SICP?
Instead of this, can I just spend all my time working on Project Euler instead?
A personal experience: Like you I am trying to learn programming by self-study and I started off with SICP. As I am a ancient historian and archaeologist, I have no background in maths, engineering or real computer science (just good knowlegde in stuff like LaTeX, HTML and CSS). My last lessons in math are now 15 years ago. Although I am working through SICP with a math book at my side the explanations given in SICP are really sufficient to understand the stuff. I really appreciate SICP, it is demanding, but great fun. I also would recommend to buy it as a book, I prefer that from reading on screen.
Sometimes you have to cope with some difficulties because language standards have changed (eg. Running SICP Pattern Matching Rule Based Substitution Code) or the authors assume existing functions which are just defined later in the book (eg. How do I get the functions put and get in SICP, Scheme, Exercise 2.78 and on). As a you always will find solutions or hints on the web this is nothing which should bother you.
If you know any amount of programming you'll likely be better off for it, but it's by no means a requirement when going through the SICP. I'm going through it right now (cover to cover style), and I'm up too section 2.3.3. The biggest road block for me has been how maths based some of the problems can be, as it's been a while since I did maths back in high school. For these problems I've resorted to googling an explanation of the problem and solution. Like programming, maths isn't a requirement either, obviously because I'm still making progress through the book, but I feel it could help at times.
The only requirement you'll honestly need, is a computer and a scheme implementation, I'd recommend MIT scheme or DrRacket.
TL;DR
The only requirement you'll need is a computer, and a scheme implementation, everything else can be learned as you go along.
Closed. This question does not meet Stack Overflow guidelines. It is not currently accepting answers.
We don’t allow questions seeking recommendations for books, tools, software libraries, and more. You can edit the question so it can be answered with facts and citations.
Closed 6 years ago.
Improve this question
I want to advertise OCaml to beginners, and I am looking for good tutorials in English; not that you have only heard of, but that you have actually tried and found useful...
I quite like the book Developing Applications With Objective Caml -- I guess the title should be updated to mirror the 'OCaml' naming decision. It is old and therefore slightly out-of-date, but on only minor aspects -- eg., it presents the stream syntax as belonging to the core language, but it is now outsourced as a Camlp4 extension. The book is surprisingly complete, and there is a lot of meat already in the chapters 2, 3 and 4.
This books covers a bit of system programming, but if it's what the reader is interested in, I would rather recommend the separate book Unix system programming in OCaml -- also translated into english by a community effort.
Finally, if one want to discover the theoretical underpinnings of OCaml, If found the U3 book, Using, Understanding, and Unraveling the OCaml Language to be a great resource. But it's only for readers that already know about OCaml.
PS: I have a very good opinion on Jason Hickey's introduction to Objective Caml as well, but I can't say I have read it in full, only glanced at it. That's the problem with "beginners" books, you can really read at most one good one.
For me, the primary one is:
$ apt-cache show ocaml-book-en
Package: ocaml-book-en
Source: ocaml-book
Version: 1.0-5
Installed-Size: 7061
Maintainer: Debian QA Group <packages#qa.debian.org>
Architecture: all
Recommends: www-browser | pdf-viewer
Description-en: English book: "Developing applications with Objective Caml"
This is the English translation of the O'Reilly's OCaml French
book "Developpement d'applications avec Objective Caml" that can
be found in the ocaml-book-fr package.
.
This package contains both the HTML and PDF version of the book.
:)
There is also great book for system programming in OCaml and cookbook-style resource here.
The tutorial I used when learning and the one I always recommend to beginners - ocaml-tutorial.org (mirrored at ocamlcore as original site went down).
Here is a book that is intended for newcomers to programming and also those who know some programming but want to learn programming in the function-oriented paradigm, or those who simply want to learn OCaml.
An OCaml port of the book How to Think Like a Computer Scientist has been created by Nicolas Monje.
According to the website, the PDF version of the book should be downloaded
From the book:
The goal of this book is to teach you to think like a computer scientist. This way of thinking combines some of the best features of mathematics, engineering, and natural science. Like mathematicians, computer scientists use formal languages to denote ideas (specifically computations). Like engineers, they design things, assembling components into systems and evaluating tradeoffs among alternatives. Like scientists, they observe the behavior of complex systems, form hypotheses, and test predictions.
The single most important skill for a computer scientist is problem solving. Problem solving means the ability to formulate problems, think creatively about solutions, and express a solution clearly and accurately. As it turns out, the process of learning to program is an excellent opportunity to practice problem-solving skills. That’s why this chapter is called, “The way of the program.”
On one level, you will be learning to program, a useful skill by itself. On another level, you will use programming as a means to an end. As we go along, that end will become clearer.
I've just started with Ocaml, and these are tutorials that I find most helpful:
Documentation and user’s manual - most useful and official
Introduction to Caml - this one i used in my first days (recently) and it was really helpful because of it's simplicity
I thought Jason Hickey's Introduction to Objective Caml was very good (the only actual text on the language I've read, and how I started). INRIA's documentation is nice as well; and reading module signatures by themselves is quite instructive once you get the hang of it ;)
Believe it or not, OCaml was the first language I (really) learned.
There is a new book "Real World OCaml" of Jason Hickey is going to be published soon. On the web-site there is a public beta available for free. Despite the fact the book is not finished yet, I didn't notice any major mistakes or irrelevancies.
It gave me a full-fledged understanding of OCaml. It contains lots of examples illustrating concepts and could be easily considered as a tutorial. I also liked that it partly covers standart modules (List, ListLabels, Map, Sys, String, may be some others).
"The Runtime System" section in this book is very useful. It provides details about compiler implementation, memory management, linkage with foreign code, language cost intuition. The latter I consider very important, because many functional programming books cover concepts without saying how expensive they are in terms of memory and time. Highly recommend this book, especially when there is a free online version.
I'm writing to ask for some guidance on choosing a language and course of action in learning programming. I apologize if this type of question is inappropriate for Cross Validated, please advise me to another forum if that is the case.
I've seen thread after thread with questions from newbies, asking, "What is the best language to start with?" and then it always starts a flame war or someone just answers, "There's no best language, it's best to pick one and start learning it." My question is a little bit more focused than that.
First off, I've been programming my whole life, in very limited capacities. My deepest training was in C++. Whilst in my EECS degree program, I resolved to never be a software developer because I couldn't stand not interacting with people for such long periods of time. Instead I realized I wanted to be a math teacher, and so that is the path I have taken.
But now that I'm well down that path, I've started to realize that perhaps I could develop my own software to help me in the classroom. If I want to demonstrate the Euclidean algorithm, what better way than to have a piece of software that breaks down the process? Students could run that software as part of their studies, and the advanced students might even develop programs for themselves. Or, with an Ipad in hand, why not have an app that lets students take their own attendance? It would certainly streamline some of the needs of classroom management.
There's obviously a lot of great stuff already out there for math, and for education, but I want a way to more directly create things specific to my lectures. If I'm teaching a specific way of calculating a percent, I want to create an app that aligns with my teaching style, not just another calculator app that requires the student to learn twice.
The most I use in class right now is iWork Numbers/Microsoft Excel for my stats class. Students can learn the basic statistical functions, and turn some of their data into graphs.
I have dabbled a bit with R, and used Maple in college. I've started the basic tutorials for OS X/iOS development and have actually made good progress making an OS X app that takes a text string, converts it to numbers, and performs encryption using modular addition and multiplication. I sometimes use Wolfram|Alpha to save myself some time in getting quick solutions to equations or base conversions. I know of MatLab, Mathematica, and recently people have been telling me to check into Python or Ruby. I also know basic HTML, and while it's forgotten now, learned Javascript and PERL in college.
If I keep on the path of Obj-C/Cocoa, I think it will have great benefits. Unfortunately, anything I produced for Mac would only be usable on a Mac, so it wouldn't be universal for all of my students. Perhaps then learning a web language would be better. Second, I'm wondering if the primary use is mathematical, then perhaps my time would be better spent learning Mathematica Programming Language, or R, or something based less on GUI and more on simple coding of algorithms, maybe Python or Ruby?
It seems that Mathematica already has a lot of demos for different math concepts, so why reinvent the wheel is also a question I have. I think overall, it would be good to have more control and design things the way I need. And then, if I do want to make an "Attendance" app or something else, I would already have the programming experience to more easily design something for my iPad or MacBook.
The related question to this is what is a good language to teach to my students? In his TED talk, Conrad Wolfram says one of the best ways to check the understanding of a student is have them write a program. But if Mathematica does the math virtually automatically for them, then I'm not sure that will get the deeper experience of working out logic for themselves, like you do when you're writing C, or a traditional procedural language.
I know that programming takes time to learn, but I also know that at this point, my goal is not to be able to make an app like "Tiny Wings." With the app store ease, some of my work may be an extra revenue stream, but I see myself as more of a hobbyist, and now teacher looking to software development specifically for its ability to help me demonstrate mathematical concepts.
I think I will push ahead with Obj-C/Cocoa for OSX/iOS, but if anyone has some better guidance regarding all of the other available stuff, it would be much appreciated. I don't think I would want to go fully to the web (I like apps), but perhaps someone could suggest a nice way of bridging what I produce in XCode to a universal web version. For example, if you come up with an algorithm in obj-c is it easiest to transition that to ruby and run it online, or is there another approach that works better?
Mathematica is pretty awesome for the first part of your question. I've used the interactive mode (Manipulate[]) for explaining things to my colleges (and myself). It makes really nice dynamic figures and is fairly expressive (although your code can end up looking like line noise). It is very powerful, but it does far less for you than you might think. It's pretty intuitive, which is a good thing for teaching.
You could use Scala if you want an "easy" way to make a domain specific language for teaching. Python seems to confuse people as a first programming language. Objective C seems like a completely random choice to me.
Mathematica then. It's worth the price. But anything that is interpreted and has an interactive shell is probably better than a compiled language. BBC BASIC?
Nothing beats Haskell for general-purpose mathematical programming. The wiki's quite extensive and the IRC channel (#haskell on Freenode) is great for asking questions. If you statically link your binaries on compilation, you should be able to run your programs on just about any system (with a few exceptions, e.g., libgmp).
Haskell code reads (roughly) like mathematical notation once you get the hang of it, so it can really help to tie things together for your students who are motivated to write their own programs. The purely functional style can be beneficial, as well, since it focuses less on I/O and the marshalling of data (perfectly useful in applications, perhaps less so in pure math), and more on the actual creation and refinement of functions and algorithms. You can even compose functions just as you would on paper.
If you want to get really serious, you could also look into Coq or Agda, but those might be a bit much for most classes.
For a Haskell program idea for an educator, check out this link.
A nice list of arguments can also be found at:
Eleven Reasons to use Haskell as a Mathematician and the book The Haskell Road to Logic, Maths and Programming
Suppose I want to implement an interpreter for a functional language. I would like to understand the issues involved in doing so and suitable literature that is available. This is a new language that is in early design stages, that is why the question is broad in scope.
For the purpose of this discussion we can assume that the purpose of the language is not important and that its functional features can be changed (even drastically) if it makes a significant difference in the ease of writing an interpreter.
The MIT website has an online copy of Structure and Interpretation of Computer Programs as well as videos of the MIT 6.001 lectures using Scheme, recorded at HP in 1986. These form a great introduction to language design.
I would highly recommend Structure and Interpretation of Computer Programs (SICP) as a starting point. This book will introduce the idea of what it means to write an interpreter (and a compiler), and is generally a must-read for anybody designing languages.
Implementing an interpreter for a functional language isn't likely to be too much different from implementing an interpreter for any other general purpose language. There's lexical analysis, parsing, AST construction, semantic analysis, plus execution (for a pure interpreter) or code generation and optimisation (for a compiler, even compiling to bytecode like Java/Perl/Python). SICP will introduce the difference between "applicative order" and "normal order" evaluation, which may be important for you in a pure functional context.
For just about any language interpreter or compiler, the main issues are the same, I think.
You need to decide certain basic characteristics of the language (semantics, not syntax), and the bulk of the design of the thing follows from that.
For example, does your language have
a type system? If so, what sorts of
types does it have? Is it going to be
statically typed, dynamically typed,
duck-typed?
What sort of expressions are you
planning to support? Do you need to
define an order of operations? Will
you even have operators?
What will you use as the run-time
representation of the program? Will
you convert the text to a byte-code
representation, or an AST, or a
tokenized form of the source text?
There are toolkits available to help take some of the tedium out of the actual parsing of text (ANTLR and Bison, to name two), but I don't know of anything that helps with the actual interpretation part of the task. I'm sure somebody will suggest something.
The main issue is having a semantics for the language you're implementing -- with that, the implementation becomes straightforward. Otherwise, this question is incredibly broad and hard to answer.
I'd recommend Essentials of Programming Languages as a good complement to SICP, particularly if you're interested in interpreters: Official EOPL site. You may want to check out the third edition-- the site hasn't been updated for it yet.
Edit: spam prevention is making me choose between links, so the official page is now unheated. It's easily Google-able, though.