Enforcing a stronger difference between the two syntaxes "simpl

reference" and "simpl pattern" in the code (maybe we should have
merged them instead, but I finally decided to enforce their
difference, even if some compatibility is to be preversed - the idea
is that at some time "simpl reference" would only call a weak-head
simpl (or eventually cbn), leading e.g. to reduce 2+n into S(1+n)
rather than S(S(n)) which could be useful for better using induction
hypotheses.

In the process we also implement the following:
- 'simpl "+"' is accepted to reduce all applicative subterms whose
  head symbol is written "+" (in the toplevel scope); idem for
  vm_compute and native_compute
- 'simpl reference' works even if reference has maximally inserted
  implicit arguments (this solves the "simpl fst" incompatibility)
- compatibility of ltac expressions referring to vm_compute and
  native_compute with functor application should now work (i.e.
  vm_compute and native_compute are now taken into account in
  tacsubst.ml)
- for compatibility, "simpl eq" (assuming no maximal implicit args in
  eq) or "simpl @eq" to mean "simpl (eq _ _)" are still allowed.

By the way, is "mul" on nat defined optimally? "3*n" simplifies to
"n+(n+(n+0))". Are there some advantages of this compared to have it
simplified to "n+n+n" (i.e. to "(n+n)+n").

1 files changed, 1 insertions, 1 deletions

diff --git a/theories/Numbers/Cyclic/Abstract/CyclicAxioms.v b/theories/Numbers/Cyclic/Abstract/CyclicAxioms.v
index 17c69d226..3586cb7f2 100644
--- a/theories/Numbers/Cyclic/Abstract/CyclicAxioms.v
+++ b/theories/Numbers/Cyclic/Abstract/CyclicAxioms.v
@@ -290,7 +290,7 @@ Module ZnZ.
  intros p Hp.
  generalize (spec_of_pos p).
  case (of_pos p); intros n w1; simpl.
- case n; simpl Npos; auto with zarith.
+ case n; auto with zarith.
  intros p1 Hp1; contradict Hp; apply Z.le_ngt.
  replace (base digits) with (1 * base digits + 0) by ring.
  rewrite Hp1.