| Commit message (Collapse) | Author | Age |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Funnily enough, the old code is completely bogus. It succeeds in early files
of the prelude just because the heterogeneous equality has not been required.
This raises an exception which is not the same one as if we tried to rewrite
with the identity type first.
The only user, the inversion tactic, was actually only relying on Logic.eq
and was furthermore not even using the convertibility algorithm. We just
perform a syntactic match now.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
We'd like to handle proofs functionally we thus recommend not to use
printing functions without an explicit context.
We also adapt most of the code, making more explicit where the
printing environment is coming from.
An open task is to refactor some code so we gradually make the
`Pfedit.get_current_context ()` disappear.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
ML level can set the flags themselves.
In particular, using injection and discriminate with option "Keep
Proofs Equalities" when called from "decide equality" and "Scheme
Equality".
This fixes bug #5281.
|
|
|
|
|
| |
The old algorithm was relying on list membership, which is O(n). This was
nefarious for terms with many binders. We use instead sets in O(log n).
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Reminder of (some of) the reasons for removal:
- Despite the claim in sigma.mli, it does *not* prevent evar
leaks, something like:
fun env evd ->
let (evd',ev) = new_evar env evd in
(evd,ev)
will typecheck even with Sigma-like type annotations (with a proof of
reflexivity)
- The API stayed embryonic. Even typing functions were not ported to
Sigma.
- Some unsafe combinators (Unsafe.tclEVARS) were replaced with slightly
less unsafe ones (e.g. s_enter), but those ones were not marked unsafe
at all (despite still being so).
- There was no good story for higher order functions manipulating evar
maps. Without higher order, one can most of the time get away with
reusing the same name for the updated evar map.
- Most of the code doing complex things with evar maps was using unsafe
casts to sigma. This code should be fixed, but this is an orthogonal
issue.
Of course, this was showing a nice and elegant use of GADTs, but the
cost/benefit ratio in practice did not seem good.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
This is the continuation of #244, we now deprecate `CErrors.error`,
the single entry point in Coq is `user_err`.
The rationale is to allow for easier grepping, and to ease a future
cleanup of error messages. In particular, we would like to
systematically classify all error messages raised by Coq and be sure
they are properly documented.
We restore the two functions removed in #244 to improve compatibility,
but mark them deprecated.
|
|\ |
|
| | |
|
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| | |
This completes the Loc.ghost removal, the idea is to gear the API
towards optional, but uniform, location handling.
We don't print <unknown> anymore in the case there is no location.
This is what the test suite expects.
The old printing logic for located items was a bit inconsistent as
it sometimes printed <unknown> and other times it printed nothing as
the caller checked for `is_ghost` upstream.
|
|/
|
|
| |
Now it is a private field, locations are optional.
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Now they are useless because all of the primitives are (should?) be
evar-insensitive.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Incidentally, this fixes a printing bug in output/inference.v where the
displayed name of an evar was the wrong one because its type was not
evar-expanded enough.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
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.
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|\ |
|
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| | |
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.
|
| |
| |
| |
| | |
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.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
module)
For the moment, there is an Error module in compilers-lib/ocamlbytecomp.cm(x)a
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
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.
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
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.
|
|
|
|
|
| |
- Fixing dead code, doc.
- Relaxing constraints on using an as-tuple in inversion.
|
|\ |
|
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| | |
The length of the pattern should now be exactly the number of
assumptions and definitions introduced by the destruction or induction,
including the induction hypotheses in case of an induction.
Like for pattern-matching, the local definitions in the argument of
the constructor can be skipped in which case a name is automatically
created for these.
|
| | |
|