HackerReposA FIELD GUIDE TO OPEN SOURCE
ProSponsor the shelf♧ 0
← Back to top all-time
formal-land
rocq-of-rust
Rocq Prover2024–2025
formal-land / rocq-of-rust

rocq-of-rust

Formal verification tool for Rust: check 100% of execution cases of your programs to make safer applications.

Explore on GitHubRead Hacker News discussions
3Distinct people
3Mentions
0Explicit recommenders
1.2KGitHub stars
REPOSITORY AT A GLANCE

What to know before exploring

What it is

Formal verification tool for Rust: check 100% of execution cases of your programs to make safer applications.

GitHub

Where it is used

No documented product use has been verified yet.

What people are saying

No recommendation phrase was found in the indexed comments.

No classified warning is attached to this page. Read the discussions before treating silence as approval.

Also in these discussions

No other repository is repeatedly linked in the same discussions.

This week on Hacker News

Nov 7–Nov 14 UTC · Direct repository links and separately labeled related project stories. Indexed through 11/14/2026, 5:04:57 PM UTC.

No direct repository links were found in the indexed HN discussions over the past seven days. Older discussions are available below.

Mentions over time

HN mentions by month3 dated mentions

Observed mentions: 2024-05-15 07:36:23 UTC to 2025-05-14 00:37:58 UTC.

012024-05-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2024-06-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 1 mentions; 0 submissions, 1 commentsMay 20242024-06-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2024-07-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2024-07-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2024-08-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2024-08-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2024-09-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2024-09-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2024-10-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2024-10-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2024-11-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2024-11-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2024-12-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 commentsNov 20242024-12-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2025-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2025-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2025-02-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2025-02-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2025-03-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2025-03-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2025-04-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 1 mentions; 1 submissions, 0 comments2025-04-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2025-05-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2025-05-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2025-06-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 1 mentions; 0 submissions, 1 commentsMay 2025

Counts come from the repository’s dated source evidence. Index cutoff: 2026-11-02 08:16:59 UTC.

View mention counts and date ranges
UTC ranges include their start and exclude their end. Select a period to filter the source evidence.
PeriodStart (UTC)End (exclusive, UTC)MentionsSubmissionsComments
May 20242024-05-01 00:00:00 UTC2024-06-01 00:00:00 UTC101
Jun 20242024-06-01 00:00:00 UTC2024-07-01 00:00:00 UTC000
Jul 20242024-07-01 00:00:00 UTC2024-08-01 00:00:00 UTC000
Aug 20242024-08-01 00:00:00 UTC2024-09-01 00:00:00 UTC000
Sep 20242024-09-01 00:00:00 UTC2024-10-01 00:00:00 UTC000
Oct 20242024-10-01 00:00:00 UTC2024-11-01 00:00:00 UTC000
Nov 20242024-11-01 00:00:00 UTC2024-12-01 00:00:00 UTC000
Dec 20242024-12-01 00:00:00 UTC2025-01-01 00:00:00 UTC000
Jan 20252025-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2025-02-01 00:00:00 UTC000
Feb 20252025-02-01 00:00:00 UTC2025-03-01 00:00:00 UTC000
Mar 20252025-03-01 00:00:00 UTC2025-04-01 00:00:00 UTC110
Apr 20252025-04-01 00:00:00 UTC2025-05-01 00:00:00 UTC000
May 20252025-05-01 00:00:00 UTC2025-06-01 00:00:00 UTC101

What Hacker News says

3 sources
mindwok·May 14, 2025
Yep, and Rust famously goes beyond this by modelling memory ownership at compile time. In fact, the more behaviour we can model at compile time the better when it comes to LLMs - there's some cool ideas here like transpiling Rust into languages for formal verification. See https://github.com/formal-land/coq-of-rust as an example. Formal verification was one of those things that was previously so annoying to do that it rarely made it past academic use cases or extremely important libraries, but I think LLMs take the tedium out of it. Perhaps formal verification will have a "test driven development" type of moment in the sun thanks to this.
In Type-constrained code generation with language models
thaliaarchi·May 15, 2024
That's really impressive. Automatic translation like this shifts the trust to the tool. coq-of-rust itself is written in Rust, not in Coq. The recursive nature is somewhat boggling, but I think a proof of its correctness is possible in a similar process to David A. Wheeler's “Countering Trusting Trust through Diverse Double-Compiling” (2009) [0] (which circumvents Ken Thompson's Trusting Trusting attack by using a second compiler), but with a mix of a CompCert approach. To verify it, you'd use coq-of-rust to convert the coq-of-rust translator from Rust to Coq. That translation is not trusted, because it was performed in Rust, but it doesn't matter. Once in Coq, you prove the desired correctness properties—crucially, that it preserves the semantics of the Rust program when it translates a program to Coq. As in the article, it is likely eas
Read the rest
ier to work with more functional definitions in proofs instead of generated ones, so you'd undertake the same process as they do with the stdlib of proving equivalence between definitions. Since the current line count for the coq-of-rust translator (specifically, lib/ [1]) is 6350 lines of Rust, it even seems feasible to write a full translator in Coq and prove its equivalence to the generated one. Then, you execute the proven-correct Coq coq-of-rust translator on the Rust source of the coq-of-rust translator. The Coq definitions it outputs should match the output of the Rust coq-of-rust translator that you started with. As an aside, it's nice to see industry funding for work like this. I'm often cynical of cryptocurrency, but its correctness constraints really push for improvements in areas I like (Rust, Coq, funding for masters students I know, etc.). [0]: https://dwheeler.com/trusting-trust/wheelerd-trust.pdf [1]: https://github.com/formal-land/coq-of-rust/tree/main/lib
In Translation of Rust's core and alloc crates to Coq for formal verification

MAKE YOURSELF AT HOME

A few shortcuts

/
Search the collection
?
Open this guide
Esc
Close dialogs and navigation

Your saved repositories and interests stay in this browser.