| Commit message (Collapse) | Author | Age |
|---|
| |
|
|
|
| |
reconsider_conv_pbs -> reconsider_unif_constraints
consider_remaining_unif_problems -> solve_unif_constraints_with_heuristics
|
| |
|
|
| |
between proofs in tactic injection, with a side-effect on inversion.
|
| |\ |
|
| | | |
|
| |\| |
|
| | | |
|
| |\| |
|
| | | |
|
| | | |
|
| | | |
|
| | |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| | |
module)
For the moment, there is an Error module in compilers-lib/ocamlbytecomp.cm(x)a
|
| | |
| |
| |
| |
| | |
whd_zeta now takes an evar_map and looks in evar instances. This changes
the behavior of whd_zeta e.g. on let x := ?t in x
|
| | |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| | |
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.
|
| | |
| |
| |
| | |
Take advantage that the provided term is always a variable in Equality.is_eq_x.
|
| | |
| |
| |
| | |
Do not normalize all goals beforehand.
|
| | |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| | |
There were three versions of injection:
1. "injection term" without "as" clause:
was leaving hypotheses on the goal in reverse order
2. "injection term as ipat", first version:
was introduction hypotheses using ipat in reverse order without
checking that the number of ipat was the size of the injection
(activated with "Unset Injection L2R Pattern Order")
3. "injection term as ipat", second version:
was introduction hypotheses using ipat in left-to-right order
checking that the number of ipat was the size of the injection
and clearing the injecting term by default if an hypothesis
(activated with "Set Injection L2R Pattern Order", default one from 8.5)
There is now:
4. "injection term" without "as" clause, new version:
introducing the components of the injection in the context in
left-to-right order using default intro-patterns "?"
and clearing the injecting term by default if an hypothesis
(activated with "Set Structural Injection")
The new versions 3. and 4. are the "expected" ones in the sense that
they have the following good properties:
- introduction in the context is in the natural left-to-right order
- "injection" behaves the same with and without "as", always
introducing the hypotheses in the goal what corresponds to the
natural expectation as the changes I made in the proof scripts for
adaptation confirm
- clear the "injection" hypothesis when an hypothesis which is the
natural expectation as the changes I made in the proof scripts for
adaptation confirm
The compatibility can be preserved by "Unset Structural Injection" or
by calling "simple injection".
The flag is currently off.
|
| | |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| | |
In pat%constr, creating new evars is now allowed only if "eintros" is
given, i.e. "intros" checks that no evars are created, and similarly
e.g. for "injection ... as ... pat%constr".
The form "eintros [...]" or "eintros ->" with the case analysis or
rewrite creating evars is now also supported.
This is not a commitment to say that it is good to have an e- modifier
to tactics. It is just to be consistent with the existing convention.
It seems to me that the "no e-" variants are good for beginners. However,
expert might prefer to use the e-variants by default. Opinions from
teachers and users would be useful.
To be possibly done: do that [= ...] work on hypotheses with side
conditions or parameters based on the idea that they apply the full
injection and not only the restriction of it to goals which are
exactly an equality, as it is today.
|
| | |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| | |
It is indeed confusing, as it has little to do with the proper refine defined
in the New submodule. Legacy code relying on it should call the Logic or
Tacmach modules instead.
|
| | | |
|
| | | |
|
| |\| |
|
| | |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| | |
preserved, which is a source of incompatibilities w.r.t. released 8.5
but which looks to me to be the only possible canonical behavior.
This is I believe a better behavior than the Regular Subst Tactic
behavior in the released 8.5 and 8.5pl1. There, the order of
hypotheses in which substitutions happened was respected, but their
interleaving with other hypotheses was not respected.
So, I consider this to be a fix to the "Regular Subst Tactic" mode.
Also added a more detailed "specification" of the "Regular" behavior
of "subst" in the reference manual.
|
| |\| |
|
| | |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| | |
Try first to find a keyed subterm without conversion/betaiota on open
terms (that is the usual strategy of rewrite), if this fails, try with full
conversion, incuding betaiota. This makes the test-suite pass again,
retaining efficiency in the most common cases.
|
| |\| |
|
| | | |
|
| | |
| |
| |
| | |
unification.
|
| |\ \ |
|
| | | | |
|
| | | | |
|
| |/ /
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| | |
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.
|
| |\| |
|
| | | |
|
| |\| |
|
| | |
| |
| |
| |
| | |
[rewrite] was calling find_suterm using the wrong unification flags, not
allowing full delta in unification of terms with the right keys as desired.
|
| |\ \ |
|
| | | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | | |
The structure of the Context module was refined in such a way that:
- Types and functions related to rel-context declarations were put into the Context.Rel.Declaration module.
- Types and functions related to rel-context were put into the Context.Rel module.
- Types and functions related to named-context declarations were put into the Context.Named.Declaration module.
- Types and functions related to named-context were put into the Context.Named module.
- Types and functions related to named-list-context declarations were put into Context.NamedList.Declaration module.
- Types and functions related to named-list-context were put into Context.NamedList module.
Some missing comments were added to the *.mli file.
The output of ocamldoc was checked whether it looks in a reasonable way.
"TODO: cleanup" was removed
The order in which are exported functions listed in the *.mli file was changed.
(as in a mature modules, this order usually is not random)
The order of exported functions in Context.{Rel,Named} modules is now consistent.
(as there is no special reason why that order should be different)
The order in which are functions defined in the *.ml file is the same as the order in which they are listed in the *.mli file.
(as there is no special reason to define them in a different order)
The name of the original fold_{rel,named}_context{,_reverse} functions was changed to better indicate what those functions do.
(Now they are called Context.{Rel,Named}.fold_{inside,outside})
The original comments originally attached to the fold_{rel,named}_context{,_reverse} did not full make sense so they were updated.
Thrown exceptions are now documented.
Naming of formal parameters was made more consistent across different functions.
Comments of similar functions in different modules are now consistent.
Comments from *.mli files were copied to *.ml file.
(We need that information in *.mli files because that is were ocamldoc needs it.
It is nice to have it also in *.ml files because when we are using Merlin and jump to the definion of the function,
we can see the comments also there and do not need to open a different file if we want to see it.)
When we invoke ocamldoc, we instruct it to generate UTF-8 HTML instead of (default) ISO-8859-1.
(UTF-8 characters are used in our ocamldoc markup)
"open Context" was removed from all *.mli and *.ml files.
(Originally, it was OK to do that. Now it is not.)
An entry to dev/doc/changes.txt file was added that describes how the names of types and functions have changed.
|
| |/ / |
|
| | |
| |
| |
| | |
since the clear_flag is new.
|
| |\| |
|
| | |
| |
| |
| |
| | |
Everywhere we know that the universes of the left argument are an
extension of the right argument, we do not have to merge universes.
|
| | | |
|
| | | |
|
| |\| |
|
| | |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| | |
Side effects are now an opaque data type, called private_constant, you can
only obtain from safe_typing. When add_constant is called on a
definition_entry that contains private constants, they are either
- inlined in the main proof term but not re-checked
- declared globally without re-checking them
As a safety measure, the opaque data type contains a pointer to the
revstruct (an internal field of safe_env that changes every time a new
constant is added), and such pointer is compared with the current value
store in safe_env when the private_constant is inlined. Only when the
comparison is successful the private_constant is not re-checked. Otherwise
else it is. In short, we accept into the kernel private constant only
when they arrive in the very same order and on top of the very same env
they arrived when we fist checked them.
Note: private_constants produced by workers never pass the safety
measure (the revstruct pointer is an Ephemeron). Sending back the
entire revstruct is possible but: 1. we lack a way to quickly compare
two revstructs, 2. it can be large.
|
| | | |
|
| | |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| | |
This is not perfect though, some primitives are unsound, and some
higher-order API should use polymorphic functions so as not to depend
on a given level.
|
| | | |
|
| | | |
|
| |\| |
|
Matthieu Sozeau
Yves Bertot
Pierre-Marie Pédrot
Hugo Herbelin
Maxime Dénès
Guillaume Melquiond
Pierre Letouzey
Matthieu Sozeau
Matej Kosik
Enrico Tassi