| Commit message (Collapse) | Author | Age |
|---|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
projections.
- lift accounting for the record missing in computing the subst from
fields to projections of the record
- substitution for parameters should not lift the local definitions
- typo in building the latter (subst -> letsubst)
|
| | |
|
| |
|
|
| |
inconsistent).
|
| |
|
|
| |
universes are declared correctly in the enclosing proofs evar_map's.
|
| | |
|
| |
|
|
| |
After all, let's target 8.6.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
of the return clause and of the branches (what assumed that the
implementation preserves the invariant that the return predicate and
the branches are in canonical [fun Δ => t] form, with Δ possibly
containing let-ins).
|
| | |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
which was broken after it became possible to have binding names
themselves bound to ltac variables (2fcc458af16b).
Interpretation was corrected, but error message was damaged.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
- "Proof using p*" means: use p and any section var about p.
- Simplify the grammar/parser for proof using <expression>.
- Section variables with a body (let-in) are pulled in automatically
since they are safe to be used (add no extra quantification)
- automatic clear of "unused" section variables made optional:
Set Proof Using Clear Unused.
since clearing section hypotheses does not "always work" (e.g. hint
databases are not really cleaned)
- term_typing: trigger a "suggest proof using" message also for Let
theorems.
|
| | |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
This option disallows "declare at first use" semantics for universe
variables (in @{}), forcing the declaration of _all_ universes appearing
in a definition when introducing it with syntax Definition/Inductive
foo@{i j k} .. The bound universes at the end of a definition/inductive
must be exactly those ones, no extras allowed currently.
Test-suite files using the old semantics just disable the option.
|
| |
|
|
| |
of temporary hypotheses than 76f27140e6e34 did.
|
| |
|
|
|
| |
ago) which broke compilation of theories/Logic/WKL.v (collision
between a temporary name and a user name).
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
an initial hypothesis hyp at the same position in the context.
Ensuring the same for "apply c in hyp as pat".
Ensuring that "pose proof (H ...) as H" does not change the position of H.
|
| |
|
|
| |
of syntax in test file ltac.v.
|
| | |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Sorry so much.
Reverted:
707bfd5719b76d131152a258d49740165fbafe03.
164637cc3a4e8895ed4ec420e300bd692d3e7812.
b9c96c601a8366b75ee8b76d3184ee57379e2620.
21e41af41b52914469885f40155702f325d5c786.
7532f3243ba585f21a8f594d3dc788e38dfa2cb8.
27fb880ab6924ec20ce44aeaeb8d89592c1b91cd.
fe340267b0c2082b3af8bc965f7bc0e86d1c3c2c.
d9b13d0a74bc0c6dff4bfc61e61a3d7984a0a962.
6737055d165c91904fc04534bee6b9c05c0235b1.
342fed039e53f00ff8758513149f8d41fa3a2e99.
21525bae8801d98ff2f1b52217d7603505ada2d2.
b78d86d50727af61e0c4417cf2ef12cbfc73239d.
979de570714d340aaab7a6e99e08d46aa616e7da.
f556da10a117396c2c796f6915321b67849f65cd.
d8226295e6237a43de33475f798c3c8ac6ac4866.
fdab811e58094accc02875c1f83e6476f4598d26.
|
| | |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
capturing bound names unexpectingly).
We moved renaming to after finding bindings, i.e. in pretyping
"fun x y => x + y" in an ltac environment where y is ltac-bound to x,
we type the body in environment "x y |-" but build "fun y y => Rel 2 + Rel 1"
(which later on is displayed into "fun y y0 => y + y0").
We renounced to renaming in "match" patterns, which was anyway not
working well, as e.g. in
let x := ipattern:y in (forall z, match z with S x => x | x => x end = 0).
which was producing
forall z : nat, match z with 0 => z | S y => y end = 0
because the names in default branches are treated specifically.
It would be easy to support renaming in match again, by putting the
ltac env in the Cases.pattern_matching_problem state and to rename the
names in "typs" (from build_branch), just before returning them at the
end of the function (and similarly in abstract_predicate for the names
occurring in the return predicate).
However, we rename binders in fix which were not interpreted.
There are some difficulties with evar because we want them defined in
the interpreted env (see comment to ltac_interp_name_env).
fix ltac name
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
considering trivial unifications "?x = t" in tactics working under
conjunctions (see #3545).
Also updating and fixing wrong comments in test apply.v.
|
| |
|
|
| |
Use expand projection to come back to the projection-as-constant encoding, dealing with parameters correctly.
|
| |
|
|
|
| |
Missing universe substitutions of mind_params_ctxt when typechecking
cases, which appeared only when let-ins were used.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
In case we need to backtrack on universe inconsistencies when converting
two (incompatible) instances of the same constant and unfold them.
Bug reported by Amin Timany.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
maybe ca71714).
Goal 2=2+2.
match goal with |- (_ = ?c) => simpl c end.
was working in 8.4 but was failing in 8.5beta2.
Note: Changes in tacintern.ml are otherwise purely cosmetic.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
The ~polyprop argument wasn't propagated properly anymore,
leading the extraction to try to operate on situations it cannot
handle (yet). Cf Table.error_singleton_become_prop for more details.
Regression test added.
|
| | |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
Improving treatment of recursive equations compared to 8.4 (see test-suite).
Experimenting not to unfold local defs ever in subst.
(+ Slight simplification in checking reflexive equalities only once).
|
| | |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
presence of let-ins and recursively non-uniform parameters).
The bug was in the List.chop of Inductiveops.get_arity which was wrong
in the presence of let-ins and recursively non-uniform parameters.
The bug #3491 showed up because, in addition to have let-ins, it was
wrongly detected as having recursively non-uniform parameters.
Also added some comments in declarations.mli.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
number of recursively uniform parameters in the presence of let-ins.
In practice, more recursively non-uniform parameters were assumed and
this was used especially for checking positivity of nested types,
leading to refusing more nested types than necessary (see Inductive.v).
|
| |
|
|
| |
presence of let-ins. This fixes #3491.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Parameters were missing in the context, apparently without negative
effects because the context was used only for whd normalization of
types, while reduction (in closure.ml) was resistant to unbound rels.
See however next commit for an indirect effect on the wrong
computation of non recursively uniform parameters producing an anomaly
when computing _rect schemas.
|
| | |
|
| |
|
|
| |
+ adjusting for the removal of `admit` by Arnaud Spiwack.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
- no more inconsistent Axiom in the Prelude
- STM can now process Admitted proofs asynchronously
- the quick chain can stock "Admitted" jobs in .vio files
- the vio2vo step checks the jobs but does not stock the result
in the opaque tables (they have no slot)
- Admitted emits a warning if the proof is complete
- Admitted uses the (partial) proof term to infer section variables
used (if not given with Proof using), like for Qed
- test-suite: extra line Require TestSuite.admit to each file making
use of admit
- test-suite/_CoqProject: to pass to CoqIDE and PG the right -Q flag to
find TestSuite.admit
|
| |
|
|
|
| |
do not enjoy eta-conversion and do not allow the usual failure of
subject reduction in presence of dependent pattern-matching.
|
| |
|
|
| |
clause in the presence of let-ins in the arity of inductive type).
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
This was broken by the attempt to use the same algorithm for rewriting
closed subterms than for rewriting subterms with evars: the algorithm
to find subterms (w_unify_to_subterm) did not go through evars. But
what to do when looking say, for a pattern "S ?n" in a goal "S ?x[a:=S ?y]"?
Should we unify ?x[a:=S ?y] with ?n or consider ?x as rigid and look
in the instance? If we adopt the first approach, then, what to do when
looking for "S ?n" in a goal "?x[a:=S ?y]"? Failing? Looking in the
instance? Is it normal that an evar behaves as a rigid constant when
it cannot be unified with the pattern?
|
| | |
|
| |
|
|
| |
Of course such proofs cannot be processed asynchronously
|
| | |
|
| |
|
|
| |
This reverts commit a7ed77403cd15ba1cc2c05f2b6193b46f0028eda.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
match predicates for vm_compute and compile polymorphic definitions
to constant code. Add univscompute test-suite file testing VM
computations in presence of polymorphic universes.
|
| | |
|
| | |
|
| | |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
following working:
Definition test {A B:Type} {H:A=B} (a:A) : B := rew H in a.
|
| | |
|
| | |
|
Hugo Herbelin
Matthieu Sozeau
Maxime Dénès
Guillaume Melquiond
Enrico Tassi
Pierre-Marie Pédrot
Matthieu Sozeau
Pierre Letouzey
Jason Gross