Software Alternatives & Reviews

ATS VS Coq

Compare ATS VS Coq and see what are their differences

ATS logo ATS

American Thoracic Society

Coq logo Coq

Coq is a proof assistant, which allows you to write mathematical proofs in a rigorous and formal...
  • ATS Landing page
    Landing page //
    2022-06-14
  • Coq Landing page
    Landing page //
    2022-04-17

ATS videos

Cadillac ATS Review - One Take

Coq videos

Ubiquinol CoQ-10 Supplement Review

More videos:

  • Review - Gumbenni listened to Sseth's review on Coq

Category Popularity

0-100% (relative to ATS and Coq)
Programming Language
36 36%
64% 64
OOP
27 27%
73% 73
Generic Programming Language
Programming
100 100%
0% 0

User comments

Share your experience with using ATS and Coq. For example, how are they different and which one is better?
Log in or Post with

Social recommendations and mentions

Based on our record, Coq seems to be more popular. It has been mentiond 46 times since March 2021. We are tracking product recommendations and mentions on various public social media platforms and blogs. They can help you identify which product is more popular and what people think of it.

ATS mentions (0)

We have not tracked any mentions of ATS yet. Tracking of ATS recommendations started around Mar 2021.

Coq mentions (46)

  • The First Stable Release of a Rust-Rewrite Sudo Implementation
    Are those more important than, say: - Proven with Coq, a formal proof management system: https://coq.inria.fr/ See in the real world: https://aws.amazon.com/security/provable-security/ And check out Computer-Aided Verification (CAV). - Source: Hacker News / 6 months ago
  • In Which I Claim Rich Hickey Is Wrong
    Dafny and Whiley are two examples with explicit verification support. Idris and other dependently typed languages should all be rich enough to express the required predicate but might not necessarily be able to accept a reasonable implementation as proof. Isabelle, Lean, Coq, and other theorem provers definitely can express the capability but aren't going to churn out much in the way of executable programs;... - Source: Hacker News / 9 months ago
  • If given a list of properties/definitions and relationship between them, could a machine come up with (mostly senseless, but) true implications?
    Still, there are many useful tools based on these ideas, used by programmers and mathematicians alike. What you describe sounds rather like Datalog (e.g. Soufflé Datalog), where you supply some rules and an initial fact, and the system repeatedly expands out the set of facts until nothing new can be derived. (This has to be finite, if you want to get anywhere.) In Prolog (e.g. SWI Prolog) you also supply a set of... Source: 10 months ago
  • Mark Petruska has requested 250000 Algos for the development of a Coq-avm library for AVM version 8
    Information about the Coq proof assistant: https://coq.inria.fr/ , https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coq. Source: 12 months ago
  • Basic SAT model of x86 instructions using Z3, autogenerated from Intel docs
    This type of thing can help you formally verify code. So, if your proof is correct, and your description of the (language/CPU) is correct, you can prove the code does what you think it does. Formal proof systems are still growing up, though, and they are still pretty hard to use. See Coq for an introduction: https://coq.inria.fr/. - Source: Hacker News / 12 months ago
View more

What are some alternatives?

When comparing ATS and Coq, you can also consider the following products

Rust - A safe, concurrent, practical language

Agda - Agda is a dependently typed functional programming language. It has inductive families, i.e.

Go.CD - Open source continuous delivery tool allows for advanced workflow modeling and dependencies management.

Isabelle - Isabelle is a proof assistant for writing and checking mathematical proofs by computer.

NIM - GB64.COM is the home of The Gamebase Collection of C64 games.

Lean - Clean up your Live Photos