> No, proofs were usually done in an entirely separate class later Okay, now that is contemptible. And you didn't address my question: Were your proofs about a

> No, proofs were usually done in an entirely separate class later Okay, now that is contemptible. And you didn't address my question: Were your proofs about actual programs, or merely about informal algorithm descriptions? > What makes using a different language such a poor choice in this context? The fact you would waste too much time teaching a second language at a sufficiently rigorous level to write proofs about programs written in it.