I've bought a X3 and I loved it (with crosspoint). However, the screen broke after just a week, even if I used the official cover all the time. It's a cute gadget but it's too fragile for the intended use: its strength is the form factor, you want to bring it with yourself to read a page in any mobility setting, but its fragility is a critical issue.
We use JBMC as the engine to do the verification (unmodified). bmc4j is independent of the group, we just use the tooling (similar to kani using cbmc).
if you used you it may be aware of the gaps when it comes to java, so bmc4j does leg work to fill it in (lots of JDK modelling, kotlin intrinsics, some byte-code transformation to fill in soundness holes) while trying making the developer experience not so painful.
I started programming with Modula-2 and I really believe it was case sensitive. In fact I remember the book I used to learn it (Ogilvie) mentioning the case sensitiveness as a peculiarity of the language: "if case matters in natural languages, why programming languages should ignore it"
What you’re missing that is “red is an apple” is also possibly saying in a metaphorical sense that red is like an apple to someone - delicious, a treat, perhaps otherwise representative. In that way, the encoding of “is”’ is exactly correct - it’s an ordered pair of glyphs that imply a weak form of assignment or description. : apologies, replied to the wrong post, meant to push this up one.
The correct sentence would start with a capital letter: “Red is an apple.” This is also completely valid as in a cartoon character of an apple named Red. The subject being the start of the sentence compounds the uncertainty in meaning.
Yes, this is because there's no assignment happening up front w.r.t. the word 'red'. However, you'll notice the same kind of ambiguity for the word 'apple' in the reversed sentence, as the word 'The' can imply quite a few things following it.
Yes, I agree, I feel the term "code" potentially misleading. But even "programming" can look as a triviality when presented in schools with no context and simplistic exercises.
https://dl.acm.org/doi/abs/10.1145/3571785.3574125
Yes, I have similar concerns. These models regurgitate previously seen strings, previous benchmarks included. When you try to evaluate their sheer ability to reason on the text, however, they perform poorly.
(Our experiments with GPT-3 are here: https://doi.org/10.5220/0012007500003470)
This ITiCSE working group tried to clarify why we should be interested in programming (not coding) in education: What We Talk About When We Talk About Programs https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3571785.3574125 (open access)
The current focus on "coding skills" in schools poses the
risk of giving students an overly simplistic and impoverished idea
of what programming means and involves. Let's try to change it!