AbstractIn the constructive programming community it is commonplace to see formal developments of textbook algorithms. In the algorithm design community, on the other hand, it may be well known that the textbook solution to a problem is not the most efficient possible. However, in presenting the more efficient solution, the algorithm designer will usually omit some of the implementation details, thus creating an algorithm gap between the abstract algorithm and its concrete implementation. This is in contrast to the formal development, which usually proceeds all the way to the complete concrete implementation of the less efficient solution. We claim that the algorithm designer is forced to omit some of the details by the relative expressive ...