Imminent. I was waiting for the statistics part to be updated to the new
qualified imports, but I think we’ll just handle that one separately.
Cheers,
Gerwin
> On 28.09.2017, at 23:52, Makarius wrote:
>
> What is the status of the afp-devel repository?
>
>
What is the status of the afp-devel repository?
Isabelle2017-RC3 is fairly stable and deserves a proper afp-2017
repository fork.
Having a clear correspondence of isabelle-dev vs. afp-devel and
Isabelle2017 vs. afp-2017 also means that changes to the devel branches
can be again more ambitious.
On 28/09/17 14:20, Tobias Nipkow wrote:
> The whole project started with this AFP paper:
>
> Concerning growth of articles. I am not sure we want to provide more
> finegrained statistics for every entry, but attached you find a summary
> slide. I cannot remember precisely what is measured, but at
We can be very proud of these figures. I have occasionally compared the source
releases of Certain Other Systems over time, and noticed that proofs are still
write-only: new proofs are added, but existing proofs are almost never changed.
Larry
> On 28 Sep 2017, at 13:20, Tobias Nipkow
The whole project started with this AFP paper:
http://www21.in.tum.de/~nipkow/pubs/cicm15.html
First Max developed this just to support the statistics in the paper but then he
and Lars made it part of the AFP. There is also a hidden part that generates tex
files for these and a number of
> The AFP statistics https://www.isa-afp.org/statistics.html is very nice
> -- I often show the last diagram in presentations, as a proof of success
> of Isabelle as application platform over the years.
>
> Who is actually responsible for this tool?
Me and our student Max Haslbeck. It is part of
The AFP statistics https://www.isa-afp.org/statistics.html is very nice
-- I often show the last diagram in presentations, as a proof of success
of Isabelle as application platform over the years.
Who is actually responsible for this tool?
Is there a chance to take into account how AFP entries