Agda vs Coq

Developers should learn Agda when working on projects that require high assurance of correctness, such as in safety-critical systems, cryptography, or formal methods research meets developers should learn coq when working on safety-critical or high-assurance software where correctness is paramount, such as in aerospace, finance, or security applications. Here's our take.

Agda

Nice Pick

Developers should learn Agda when working on projects that require high assurance of correctness, such as in safety-critical systems, cryptography, or formal methods research

Pros

• It is particularly useful for verifying algorithms, proving properties of programs, and exploring advanced type systems, making it valuable in fields like programming language theory and formal verification
• Related to: dependent-types, haskell

Cons

• Specific tradeoffs depend on your use case

Coq

Developers should learn Coq when working on safety-critical or high-assurance software where correctness is paramount, such as in aerospace, finance, or security applications

Pros

• It is essential for formal methods research, verifying algorithms, and ensuring that code meets rigorous mathematical specifications, reducing bugs and vulnerabilities
• Related to: formal-methods, ocaml

Cons

• Specific tradeoffs depend on your use case

The Verdict

These tools serve different purposes. Agda is a language while Coq is a tool. We picked Agda based on overall popularity, but your choice depends on what you're building.

The Bottom Line

Agda wins

Based on overall popularity. Agda is more widely used, but Coq excels in its own space.