# Escaping the Quicksand: A Call to Arms

> Source: <https://arxiv.org/abs/2608.19674>
> Published: 2026-08-21 05:46:29+00:00

# Computer Science > Programming Languages

[Submitted on 20 Aug 2026]

# Title:Escaping the Quicksand: A Call to Arms

[View PDF](/pdf/2608.19674)

[HTML (experimental)](https://arxiv.org/html/2608.19674v1)

Abstract:Computing has been an astonishing success - but the accumulated technical debt exposes us all to huge costs in business and societal risk. For 75 years, we've built systems to prose specifications with test-and-debug development. That works well enough for industry to thrive, but it's an expensive and ineffective feedback loop, and leaves everyone relying on shaky foundations. Now, AI-enabled engineering is amplifying the success by reducing coding costs, but also amplifies the risks, by rapidly increasing technical debt, and by automating detection of the vulnerabilities therein.

How can we do better? Research has long pursued mathematical proof of correctness, which, unlike testing, can cover all cases. This too has advanced massively, but it remains hard to apply, both technically and because of a deep-seated cultural disconnect.

Instead, we argue for a pragmatic approach to flexible combinations of testing, *specification*, and proof, that provides more effective feedback loops for both AI and human development.

Most simply, one can incrementally co-develop executable-as-test-oracle partial specifications alongside conventional prose descriptions, code, and tests. This clarifies design and makes testing much more discriminating. Developers can and should do it today.

Or, even better, one can use specifications that support the full gamut of testing, property-based testing, symbolic execution, and proof. This enables a range of intertwined feedback loops, again both for AI and humans, from cheap testing to more expensive proof. However, making it really practical needs *semantics infrastructure*: specifications and tooling for the main programming languages and other abstractions, which we now more-or-less know how to build, but which is not yet in place. We call the community to arms to create and deploy it - to enable a future built on firmer ground.

### Current browse context:

cs.PL

### References & Citations

Loading...

# Bibliographic and Citation Tools

Bibliographic Explorer

*(*[What is the Explorer?](https://info.arxiv.org/labs/showcase.html#arxiv-bibliographic-explorer))
Connected Papers

*(*[What is Connected Papers?](https://www.connectedpapers.com/about))
Litmaps

*(*[What is Litmaps?](https://www.litmaps.co/))
scite Smart Citations

*(*[What are Smart Citations?](https://www.scite.ai/))# Code, Data and Media Associated with this Article

alphaXiv

*(*[What is alphaXiv?](https://alphaxiv.org/))
CatalyzeX Code Finder for Papers

*(*[What is CatalyzeX?](https://www.catalyzex.com))
DagsHub

*(*[What is DagsHub?](https://dagshub.com/))
Gotit.pub

*(*[What is GotitPub?](http://gotit.pub/faq))
Hugging Face

*(*[What is Huggingface?](https://huggingface.co/huggingface))
ScienceCast

*(*[What is ScienceCast?](https://sciencecast.org/welcome))# Demos

# Recommenders and Search Tools

Influence Flower

*(*[What are Influence Flowers?](https://influencemap.cmlab.dev/))
CORE Recommender

*(*[What is CORE?](https://core.ac.uk/services/recommender))# arXivLabs: experimental projects with community collaborators

arXivLabs is a framework that allows collaborators to develop and share new arXiv features directly on our website.

Both individuals and organizations that work with arXivLabs have embraced and accepted our values of openness, community, excellence, and user data privacy. arXiv is committed to these values and only works with partners that adhere to them.

Have an idea for a project that will add value for arXiv's community? [ Learn more about arXivLabs](https://info.arxiv.org/labs/index.html).
