Coincidentally, by running it on one of my test files, I just noticed that
mmverify.py suffers from the exact same issue
<https://github.com/david-a-wheeler/mmverify.py/issues/30> of allowing
proofs to reference inactive hypotheses belonging to other theorems.
Centralizing all the test suites probably would be a good idea.

On Wed, Sep 17, 2025 at 10:32 AM David A. Wheeler <[email protected]>
wrote:

>
>
> > On Sep 16, 2025, at 6:42 PM, Jim Kingdon <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > Those all sound like good things to add to the testsuite.
>
> Patches welcome :-) to:
> https://github.com/david-a-wheeler/metamath-test
>
>
> > (The tests in the metamath-exe and metamath-knife repos are I think
> better developed, although in principle some of their tests could be fed
> back to a testsuite which could be run on any verifier).
>
> That was my goal for metamath-test. I also think it's useful to have a
> "general" test suite.
>
> I'd be happy to contribute that repo to the  https://github.com/metamath
> organization. They're all MIT licensed, allowing anyone do practically
> anything except sue the authors. Anyone want me to do that?
>
> > On September 16, 2025 12:44:47 PM PDT, Matthew House <
> [email protected]> wrote:
> > A few issues I spotted, many of which are nitpicks and some of which are
> more serious:...
> ...
> >  Writing a correct Metamath verifier requires very careful attention to
> detail, which it seems that LLMs still struggle with, short of directed
> hand-holding or extraordinarily thorough test suites. The original
> mmverify.py code is quite compact for how many details it captures.
>
>
> LLMs can be a *great* productivity aid, but only an *aid*. The emerging
> term is "AI Code Assistant" which I think gives the right flavor. They are
> helpful *assistants* to humans, but at least so far, they are not
> *replacements* for humans.
>
> --- David A. Wheeler
>
>
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Metamath" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
To view this discussion visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/metamath/CADBQv9bSGMebPM3QtCDFqfwfobCXj63c%3DyijPc65kXLq9g0vcQ%40mail.gmail.com.

Reply via email to