diff options
author | David Aspinall <da@inf.ed.ac.uk> | 1999-10-21 16:27:39 +0000 |
---|---|---|
committer | David Aspinall <da@inf.ed.ac.uk> | 1999-10-21 16:27:39 +0000 |
commit | 5f9ce5acdcfd063cade0001fcc16d0bf040e51db (patch) | |
tree | e6100e44aeff6ea42edd4c59e4cdfb197b16555d | |
parent | a10ff30ae6f515823c55d7073547aa25b63e8182 (diff) |
Revised bug section for Isabelle multiple file note.
-rw-r--r-- | doc/ProofGeneral.texi | 20 |
1 files changed, 9 insertions, 11 deletions
diff --git a/doc/ProofGeneral.texi b/doc/ProofGeneral.texi index 61b0984b..9febbe93 100644 --- a/doc/ProofGeneral.texi +++ b/doc/ProofGeneral.texi @@ -3180,6 +3180,7 @@ and @code{proof-shell-compute-new-files-list}. @xref{Hooks and function variables}. + @node Internals of Proof General @chapter Internals of Proof General @@ -4251,17 +4252,14 @@ functions, or customize some of the variables from @file{isa.el} and @subsection Interaction with theory database -Isabelle Proof General has a fragment written in ML which defines a -modified interface to the theory database. In particular, some internal -state records which files have been retracted by the interface, although -no changes are made inside Isabelle itself. This means that -re-asserting a retracted file does not need to re-load it if it has not -changed. (It is a shame that the standard theory loader provides no -such "retraction" mechanism for unlinking loaded theories). - -This means that Proof General can get confused if you use the theory -loader primitives directly in the proof shell, and the state inside -Emacs may not agree with Isabelle. You have been warned! +Isabelle Proof General uses some support from Isabelle to remove and +reload theories from the theory database. To maintain consistency, +Isabelle is rather conservative. So re-asserting a retracted file will +always re-load it, even if it has not changed. (This is because the +file may have implicit dependencies on things in the global ML +environment not made apparent by the theory structure). +This may lead to seemingly unnecessary repetition of time-consuming +proofs, so be careful not to retract more than you need! @node Plans and ideas @appendix Plans and ideas |