| Commit message (Collapse) | Author | Age |
|\ |
|
| | |
|
|/
|
|
| |
Also remove obvious comments.
|
|
|
|
|
| |
For now we only normalize sorts, and we leave instances for the next
commit.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
This removes quite a few unsafe casts. Unluckily, I had to reintroduce
the old non-module based names for these data structures, because I could
not reproduce easily the same hierarchy in EConstr.
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
This allows to factorize code and prevents the unnecessary use of back and
forth conversions between the various types of terms.
Note that functions from typing may now raise errors as PretypeError rather
than TypeError, because they call the proper wrapper. I think that they were
wrongly calling the kernel because of an overlook of open modules.
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|\ |
|
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| | |
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.
|
|/
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
In some cases prior to this patch, there were two cases for the same
error function, one taking a location, the other not.
We unify them by using an option parameter, in the line with recent
changes in warnings and feedback.
This implies a bit of clean up in some places, but more importantly, is
the preparation for subsequent patches making `Loc.location` opaque,
change that could be use to improve modularity and allow a more
functional implementation strategy --- for example --- of the
beautifier.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
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.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Unset Program Generalized Coercion to avoid coercion of general
applications.
Unset Program Cases to deactivate generation equalities and
disequalities of cases.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
By default obligations defined by tactics are defined
transparently or opaque according to the Obligations Transparent flag,
except proofs of subset obligations which are treated
as opaque by default. When the user proves the obligation using
Qed or Defined, this information takes precedence, and only
when the obligation cannot be Qed'ed because it contains
references to a recursive function an error is raised
(this prevents the guardness checker error).
Shrinked obligations were not doings this correctly.
Forcing transparency due to fixpoint prototypes
takes precedence over the user preference.
Program: do not force opacity of subset proofs,
maintaining compatibility.
|
|\ |
|
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| | |
When typing a "with clause fails, type classes are used to possibly
help to insert coercions. If this heuristic fails, do not consider it
anymore to be the best failure since it has made type classes choices
which may be inconsistent with other constraints and on which no
backtracking is possible anymore (see new example in test suite file
4782.v).
This does not mean that using type classes at this point is good. It
may find an instance which help to find a coercion, but which might
still be a choice of instance and coercion which is incompatible with
other constraints.
I tend to think that a convenient way to go to deal with the absence
of backtracking in inserting coercions would be to have special
For the record, here is a some comments of what happens regarding
f9695eb4b and 827663982.
In the presence of an instance (x:=t) given in a "with" clause, with
t:T, and x expected of type T', the situation is the following:
Before f9695eb4b:
- If T and T' are closed and T <= T' is not satisfiable (no coercion
or not convertible), the test for possible insertion of a coercion
is postponed to w_merge, even though there is no way to get more
information since T ant T' are closed. As a result, t may be
ill-typed and the unification may try to unify ill-formed terms,
leading to #4872.
- If T and T' are not closed and contains evars of type a type class,
inference of type classes is tried. If it fails, e.g. because a
wrong type class instance is found, it was postponed to w_merge as
above, and the test for coercion is retried now interleaved with
type classes.
After f9695eb4b and 827663982e:
- If T and T' are closed and T <= T' is not satisfiable (no coercion
or not convertible), the test for possible insertion of a coercion
is an immediate failure. This fixes #4872.
- However, If T and T' are not closed and contains evars of type a
type class, inference of type classes is tried. If it gives closed
terms and fails, this is immediate failure without backtracking on
type classes, resulting in the problem added here to file 4872.v.
The current fix does not consider the result of the use of type
classes while trying to insert a coercion to be the last word on
it. So, it fails with an error which is not the error for conversion
of closed terms (ConversionFailed), therefore in a way expected by
f9695eb4b and 827663982e, and the "with" typing problem is then
postponed again.
|
|\| |
|
| |
| |
| |
| |
| | |
It was not accounting for the universe constraints generated by
applications of the coercion.
|
| |
| |
| |
| |
| | |
Some parts of Evarutils were related to the management of evars under constraints.
We put them in the Evardefine file.
|
|\ \ |
|
| |/
|/| |
|
|/
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Originally, rel-context was represented as:
Context.rel_context = Names.Name.t * Constr.t option * Constr.t
Now it is represented as:
Context.Rel.t = LocalAssum of Names.Name.t * Constr.t
| LocalDef of Names.Name.t * Constr.t * Constr.t
Originally, named-context was represented as:
Context.named_context = Names.Id.t * Constr.t option * Constr.t
Now it is represented as:
Context.Named.t = LocalAssum of Names.Id.t * Constr.t
| LocalDef of Names.Id.t * Constr.t * Constr.t
Motivation:
(1) In "tactics/hipattern.ml4" file we define "test_strict_disjunction"
function which looked like this:
let test_strict_disjunction n lc =
Array.for_all_i (fun i c ->
match (prod_assum (snd (decompose_prod_n_assum n c))) with
| [_,None,c] -> isRel c && Int.equal (destRel c) (n - i)
| _ -> false) 0 lc
Suppose that you do not know about rel-context and named-context.
(that is the case of people who just started to read the source code)
Merlin would tell you that the type of the value you are destructing
by "match" is:
'a * 'b option * Constr.t (* worst-case scenario *)
or
Named.Name.t * Constr.t option * Constr.t (* best-case scenario (?) *)
To me, this is akin to wearing an opaque veil.
It is hard to figure out the meaning of the values you are looking at.
In particular, it is hard to discover the connection between the value
we are destructing above and the datatypes and functions defined
in the "kernel/context.ml" file.
In this case, the connection is there, but it is not visible
(between the function above and the "Context" module).
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Now consider, what happens when the reader see the same function
presented in the following form:
let test_strict_disjunction n lc =
Array.for_all_i (fun i c ->
match (prod_assum (snd (decompose_prod_n_assum n c))) with
| [LocalAssum (_,c)] -> isRel c && Int.equal (destRel c) (n - i)
| _ -> false) 0 lc
If the reader haven't seen "LocalAssum" before, (s)he can use Merlin
to jump to the corresponding definition and learn more.
In this case, the connection is there, and it is directly visible
(between the function above and the "Context" module).
(2) Also, if we already have the concepts such as:
- local declaration
- local assumption
- local definition
and we describe these notions meticulously in the Reference Manual,
then it is a real pity not to reinforce the connection
of the actual code with the abstract description we published.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
only one disjoint component of the typeclasses instances to resolve.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Commit df6e64fd28 let apply_coercion raise NoCoercion untrapped by inh_app_fun.
Commit 4944b5e72 caught NoCoercion but missed re-attempting inserting a
coercion after resolving instances of type classes.
This fixes MathClasses (while preserving fix of part of from 4944b5e72
and fixes of HoTT_coq_014.v from df6e64fd28).
|
|
|
|
|
| |
It enhances bug #3527, as instead of raising an anomaly "Uncaught
exception Coercion.NoCoercion(_)", it now fails with a typing error.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Some functions from pretyping/typing.ml and their derivatives were potential
source of evarmap leaks, as they dropped their resulting evarmap. This commit
clarifies the situation by renaming them according to a unsafe_* scheme. Their
sound variant is likewise renamed to their old name. The following renamings
were made.
- Typing.type_of -> unsafe_type_of
- Typing.e_type_of -> type_of
- A new e_type_of function that matches the e_ prefix policy
- Tacmach.pf_type_of -> pf_unsafe_type_of
- A new safe pf_type_of function.
All uses of unsafe_* functions should be eventually eliminated.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
e.g. for MTac.
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
so as to reproduce correctly the reduction behavior of existing
projections, i.e. delta + iota. Make [projection] an abstract datatype
in Names.ml, most of the patch is about using that abstraction.
Fix unification.ml which tried canonical projections too early in
presence of primitive projections.
|
| |
|
| |
|