(* $Id$ *) (*i*) open Util open Names open Term open Sign open Evd open Proof_trees (*i*) (* The pattern table for tactics. *) (* The idea is that we want to write tactic files which are only "activated" when certain modules are loaded and imported. Already, the question of how to store the tactics is hard, and we will not address that here. However, the question arises of how to store the patterns that we will want to use for term-destructuring, and the solution proposed is that we will store patterns with a "module-marker", telling us which modules have to be open in order to use the pattern. So we will write: \begin{verbatim} let mark = make_module_marker ["";;...];; let p1 = put_pat mark "";; \end{verbatim} And now, we can use [(get p1)] to get the term which corresponds to this pattern, already parsed and with the global names adjusted. In other words, we will have the term which we would have had if we had done an: \begin{verbatim} constr_of_com mt_ctxt (initial_sign()) "" \end{verbatim} except that it will be computed at module-opening time, rather than at tactic-application time. The ONLY difference will be that no implicit syntax resolution will happen. *) (*s First part : introduction of term patterns *) type module_mark = Stock.module_mark type marked_term val make_module_marker : string list -> module_mark val put_pat : module_mark -> string -> marked_term val get_pat : marked_term -> constr val pattern_stock : constr Stock.stock (*i** val raw_sopattern_of_compattern : typed_type signature -> CoqAst.t -> constr **i*) (*s Second part : Given a term with second-order variables in it, represented by Meta's, and possibly applied using \verb!XTRA[$SOAPP]! to terms, this function will perform second-order, binding-preserving, matching, in the case where the pattern is a pattern in the sense of Dale Miller. ALGORITHM: Given a pattern, we decompose it, flattening casts and apply's, recursing on all operators, and pushing the name of the binder each time we descend a binder. When we reach a first-order variable, we ask that the corresponding term's free-rels all be higher than the depth of the current stack. When we reach a second-order application, we ask that the intersection of the free-rels of the term and the current stack be contained in the arguments of the application, and in that case, we construct a [DLAM] with the names on the stack. *) val somatch : int list option -> constr -> constr -> (int * constr) list val somatches : constr -> marked_term -> bool val dest_somatch : constr -> marked_term -> constr list val soinstance : marked_term -> constr list -> constr val is_imp_term : constr -> bool (*s I implemented the following functions which test whether a term [t] is an inductive but non-recursive type, a general conjuction, a general disjunction, or a type with no constructors. They are more general than matching with [or_term], [and_term], etc, since they do not depend on the name of the type. Hence, they also work on ad-hoc disjunctions introduced by the user. (Eduardo, 6/8/97). *) type 'a matching_function = constr -> 'a option type testing_function = constr -> bool val match_with_non_recursive_type : (constr * constr list) matching_function val is_non_recursive_type : testing_function val match_with_disjunction : (constr * constr list) matching_function val is_disjunction : testing_function val match_with_conjunction : (constr * constr list) matching_function val is_conjunction : testing_function val match_with_empty_type : constr matching_function val is_empty_type : testing_function val match_with_unit_type : constr matching_function val is_unit_type : testing_function val match_with_equation : (constr * constr list) matching_function val is_equation : testing_function val match_with_nottype : (constr * constr) matching_function val is_nottype : testing_function