CACrown ArchivesThe cinema collection
Menu
Research dossier · General Reference

Hoare logic

formal system with a set of logical rules for reasoning rigorously about the correctness of computer programs

Cross-disciplinary reference desk with index cards, atlas, dictionary and catalogue
General referenceInterpretive dossier study · Crown Archives visual atlas
Record originEnglish Wikipedia
Text licenseCC BY-SA 4.0
Source revisionJun 14, 2026
Entity authorityQ1375924
Source-derived summary

Hoare logic (also known as Floyd–Hoare logic or Hoare rules) is a formal system with a set of logical rules for reasoning rigorously about the correctness of computer programs. It was proposed in 1969 by the British computer scientist and logician Tony Hoare, and subsequently refined by Hoare and other researchers. The original ideas were seeded by the work of Robert W. Floyd, who had published a similar system for flowcharts.

Hoare triple

The central feature of Hoare logic is the Hoare triple. A triple describes how the execution of a piece of code changes the state of the computation. A Hoare triple is of the form

{

P

}

C

{

Q

}

{\displaystyle \{P\}C\{Q\}}

where

P

{\displaystyle P}

and

Q

{\displaystyle Q}

are assertions and

C

{\displaystyle C}

is a command.

P

{\displaystyle P}

is named the precondition and

Q

{\displaystyle Q}

the postcondition: when the precondition is met, executing the command establishes the postcondition. Assertions are formulae in predicate logic.

Hoare logic provides axioms and inference rules for all the constructs of a simple imperative programming language. In addition to the rules for the simple language in Hoare's original paper, rules for other language constructs have been developed since then by Hoare and many other researchers.

Editorial summary

Begin with the source’s own compact description: “Hoare logic” is formal system with a set of logical rules for reasoning rigorously about the correctness of computer programs. The dossier treats that line as a proposition to test through Hoare, logic and formal, not as a finished interpretation.

Editorial reviewA practical starting point whose main value is the path it opens into stronger specialist and primary sources. The current lead gives the account dated anchors—1969—that can be checked directly. The selected authority fields contribute no independent date. For this dossier, Hoare, logic and formal is the immediate research focus.
Editorial analysis

Why this record matters

The phrase “formal system with a set of logical rules for reasoning rigorously about the correctness of computer programs” supplies a clear boundary for inquiry. It also exposes the unanswered questions: who defined that boundary, when it became stable and which sources sit outside it.

Evidence profile

Vocabulary and entity names are the principal evidence signals here, because they determine the precision of every later search. The source revision retrieved here is dated Jun 14, 2026. The linked authority identifier is Q1375924. None of the 0 selected statements returned an explicit reference. The first chronological checks are 1969.

Critical limits

Overview language is designed for orientation and should not be treated as a substitute for the evidence cited beneath it. The lead is largely declarative, so disagreement and counter-evidence require a deliberate search beyond the opening account. Authority statements aid reconciliation but still require their own references, qualifiers and ranks to be checked.

How to read it

Use the entry as an orientation point, then follow its citations and revision history. Names, dates and institutional relationships should be checked against the original record.

Best used for
  • Subject orientation
  • Search vocabulary
  • Locating named sources
Verify next

The closest primary source, responsible institution and strongest cited specialist reference.

Three-step research path

  1. Establish the record: confirm the title “Hoare logic”, its source revision and the description used here.
  2. Expand the search: follow Hoare logic primary sources, Hoare logic archive and Hoare research across catalogues and specialist indexes.
  3. Test the account: compare the strongest cited source with the responsible institution’s current record and note any disagreement.

Questions for further research

  1. Which source most directly establishes the central claim about “Hoare logic”?
  2. Which institution is responsible for the underlying evidence?
  3. Which cited source is closest to the event, object or claim?
Subject index

Search terms from this dossier

Source & attribution

This entry incorporates text from Hoare logic” on English Wikipedia. Contributors are listed in the page history. Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License. Selected authority identifiers and statements are retrieved from Wikidata under CC0; their references and qualifiers remain part of the verification path.