| Commit message (Collapse) | Author | Age |
|\ |
|
|\ \ |
|
| | | |
|
|\| | |
|
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | | |
Spotted by PMP.
|
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | | |
composition operator.
Short story:
This pull-request:
(1) removes the definition of the "right-to-left" function composition operator
(2) adds the definition of the "left-to-right" function composition operator
(3) rewrites the code relying on "right-to-left" function composition to rely on "left-to-right" function composition operator instead.
Long story:
In mathematics, function composition is traditionally denoted with ∘ operator.
Ocaml standard library does not provide analogous operator under any name.
Batteries Included provides provides two alternatives:
_ % _
and
_ %> _
The first operator one corresponds to the classical ∘ operator routinely used in mathematics.
I.e.:
(f4 % f3 % f2 % f1) x ≜ (f4 ∘ f3 ∘ f2 ∘ f1) x
We can call it "right-to-left" composition because:
- the function we write as first (f4) will be called as last
- and the function write as last (f1) will be called as first.
The meaning of the second operator is this:
(f1 %> f2 %> f3 %> f4) x ≜ (f4 ∘ f3 ∘ f2 ∘ f1) x
We can call it "left-to-right" composition because:
- the function we write as first (f1) will be called first
- and the function we write as last (f4) will be called last
That is, the functions are written in the same order in which we write and read them.
I think that it makes sense to prefer the "left-to-right" variant because
it enables us to write functions in the same order in which they will be actually called
and it thus better fits our culture
(we read/write from left to right).
|
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | | |
which can be useful in general, and then simplifying "Printer.pr_named_decl" function
|
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | | |
"Context.Named.{to,of}_rel_decl"
|
| | | |
|
|\| | |
|
| | | |
|
| | | |
|
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | | |
"Context.{Rel,Named}.fold_constr"
|
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | | |
mainly concerning referring to "Context.{Rel,Named}.get_{id,value,type}" functions.
If multiple modules define a function with a same name, e.g.:
Context.{Rel,Named}.get_type
those calls were prefixed with a corresponding prefix
to make sure that it is obvious which function is being called.
|
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | | |
more cleanups
|
|\ \ \ |
|
| | | | |
|
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | | |
This fixes #3450 and probably provides a huge speed-up to many instances.
|
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | | |
Suggested by @ppedrot
|
| |_|/
|/| |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | | |
As noted by @ppedrot, the first is redundant. The patch is basically a renaming.
We didn't make the component optional yet, but this could happen in a
future patch.
|
|\ \ \
| | |/
| |/| |
|
| |/
|/|
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| | |
"Context.Rel.Declaration.to_tuple" function"
This reverts commit 4b24bb7d3b770592015c264001b9aed9fe95c200.
While the of_tuple function is clearly dubious and mostly used for compatiblity reasons,
and thus had to be removed, I think that the to_tuple function is still useful as it
allows to access each component of the declaration piecewise. Without it, some codes
tend to get cluttered with useless projections here and there.
|
| | |
|
| |
| |
| |
| | |
function
|
| |
| |
| |
| | |
function
|
|/ |
|
|\ |
|
| | |
|
|\| |
|
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| | |
In coqtop, one could do for instance:
Require Import Top. (* Where Top contains a Definition b := true *)
Lemma bE : b = true. Proof. reflexivity. Qed.
Definition b := false.
Lemma bad : False. Proof. generalize bE; compute; discriminate. Qed.
That proof could however not be saved because of the circular dependency check.
Safe_typing now checks that we are not requiring (Safe_typing.import) a library
with the same logical name as the current one.
|
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| | |
Because refreshing Prop is not semantics-preserving,
the new universe is >= Set, so cannot be minimized to Prop
afterwards.
|
| |
| |
| |
| | |
For the moment, there is a Closure module in compiler-libs/ocamloptcomp.cm(x)a
|
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| | |
module)
For the moment, there is an Error module in compilers-lib/ocamlbytecomp.cm(x)a
|
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| | |
This is a reimplementation of Hugo's PR#117.
We are trying to address the problem that the name of some reduction functions
was not saying what they were doing (e.g. whd_betadeltaiota was doing let-in
reduction). Like PR#117, we are careful that no function changed semantics
without changing the names. Porting existing ML code should be a matter of
renamings a few function calls.
Also, we introduce more precise reduction flags fMATCH, fFIX, fCOFIX
collectively denominated iota.
We renamed the following functions:
Closure.betadeltaiota -> Closure.all
Closure.betadeltaiotanolet -> Closure.allnolet
Reductionops.beta -> Closure.beta
Reductionops.zeta -> Closure.zeta
Reductionops.betaiota -> Closure.betaiota
Reductionops.betaiotazeta -> Closure.betaiotazeta
Reductionops.delta -> Closure.delta
Reductionops.betalet -> Closure.betazeta
Reductionops.betadelta -> Closure.betadeltazeta
Reductionops.betadeltaiota -> Closure.all
Reductionops.betadeltaiotanolet -> Closure.allnolet
Closure.no_red -> Closure.nored
Reductionops.nored -> Closure.nored
Reductionops.nf_betadeltaiota -> Reductionops.nf_all
Reductionops.whd_betadelta -> Reductionops.whd_betadeltazeta
Reductionops.whd_betadeltaiota -> Reductionops.whd_all
Reductionops.whd_betadeltaiota_nolet -> Reductionops.whd_allnolet
Reductionops.whd_betadelta_stack -> Reductionops.whd_betadeltazeta_stack
Reductionops.whd_betadeltaiota_stack -> Reductionops.whd_all_stack
Reductionops.whd_betadeltaiota_nolet_stack -> Reductionops.whd_allnolet_stack
Reductionops.whd_betadelta_state -> Reductionops.whd_betadeltazeta_state
Reductionops.whd_betadeltaiota_state -> Reductionops.whd_all_state
Reductionops.whd_betadeltaiota_nolet_state -> Reductionops.whd_allnolet_state
Reductionops.whd_eta -> Reductionops.shrink_eta
Tacmach.pf_whd_betadeltaiota -> Tacmach.pf_whd_all
Tacmach.New.pf_whd_betadeltaiota -> Tacmach.New.pf_whd_all
And removed the following ones:
Reductionops.whd_betaetalet
Reductionops.whd_betaetalet_stack
Reductionops.whd_betaetalet_state
Reductionops.whd_betadeltaeta_stack
Reductionops.whd_betadeltaeta_state
Reductionops.whd_betadeltaeta
Reductionops.whd_betadeltaiotaeta_stack
Reductionops.whd_betadeltaiotaeta_state
Reductionops.whd_betadeltaiotaeta
They were unused and having some reduction functions perform eta is confusing
as whd_all and nf_all don't do it.
|
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| | |
On the user side, coqtop and coqc take a list of warning names or categories
after -w. No prefix means activate the warning, a "-" prefix means deactivate
it, and "+" means turn the warning into an error. Special categories include
"all", and "default" which contains the warnings enabled by default.
We also provide a vernacular Set Warnings which takes the same flags as argument.
Note that coqc now prints warnings.
The name and category of a warning are printed with the warning itself.
On the developer side, Feedback.msg_warning is still accessible, but the
recommended way to print a warning is in two steps:
1) create it by:
let warn_my_warning =
CWarnings.create ~name:"my-warning" ~category:"my-category"
(fun args -> Pp.strbrk ...)
2) print it by:
warn_my_warning args
|
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| | |
Fix bug in Shrink obligations with Program in the process.
Fix implementation of shrink for abstract proofs
- Update doc in term.mli to reflect the fact that let-in's
are part of what is returned by [decompose_lam_assum].
|
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| | |
This is a first step to relay location info in an uniform way, as needed
by warnings and other mechanisms.
The location info remains unused for now, but coqtop printing could take
advantage of it if so wished.
|
| |
| |
| |
| | |
above it.
|
| | |
|
| | |
|
| | |
|
| |
| |
| |
| |
| | |
This allows a smooth addition of various unsafe flags without wreaking
havoc in the ML codebase.
|
| | |
|
|\ \ |
|
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | | |
The rational is that
1. further typing flags may be available in the future
2. it makes it easier to trace and document the argument
|
| | | |
|
| | | |
|
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | | |
This breaks compilation via ocamlbuild, and also leads to awkward
commands via make
|
|\ \ \
| | |/
| |/| |
|
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | | |
If the second allocation causes a collection of the minor heap, the first
allocation will be freed, thus causing a memory corruption.
Note: it only happens when computing the native projection of an opaque
value while the minor heap is almost full.
|