diff options
| author | Jim Fehrle | 2020-04-01 13:18:03 -0700 |
|---|---|---|
| committer | Jim Fehrle | 2020-06-08 16:50:53 -0700 |
| commit | 27d6686f399f40904ff6005a84677907d53c5bbf (patch) | |
| tree | 5a27b8acdab8ce79b9a7d10685c8979cda82416b /doc/sphinx/user-extensions | |
| parent | 6a76e4394876cb08b02d8e7ea185049147f9cd2b (diff) | |
Convert Ltac chapter to prodn
Diffstat (limited to 'doc/sphinx/user-extensions')
| -rw-r--r-- | doc/sphinx/user-extensions/syntax-extensions.rst | 28 |
1 files changed, 14 insertions, 14 deletions
diff --git a/doc/sphinx/user-extensions/syntax-extensions.rst b/doc/sphinx/user-extensions/syntax-extensions.rst index 955f2055e4..3c92206fd2 100644 --- a/doc/sphinx/user-extensions/syntax-extensions.rst +++ b/doc/sphinx/user-extensions/syntax-extensions.rst @@ -1747,18 +1747,18 @@ Tactic notations allow customizing the syntax of tactics. The nonterminals that can specified in the tactic notation are: - .. todo uconstr represents a type with holes. At the moment uconstr doesn't - appear in the documented grammar. Maybe worth ressurecting with a better name, - maybe "open_term"? - see https://github.com/coq/coq/pull/11718#discussion_r413721234 - - .. todo 'open_constr' appears to be another possible value based on the - the message from "Tactic Notation open_constr := idtac". - Also (at least) "ref", "string", "preident", "int" and "ssrpatternarg". - (from reading .v files). - Looks like any string passed to "make0" in the code is valid. But do - we want to support all these? - @JasonGross's opinion here: https://github.com/coq/coq/pull/11718#discussion_r415387421 + .. todo uconstr represents a type with holes. At the moment uconstr doesn't + appear in the documented grammar. Maybe worth ressurecting with a better name, + maybe "open_term"? + see https://github.com/coq/coq/pull/11718#discussion_r413721234 + + .. todo 'open_constr' appears to be another possible value based on the + the message from "Tactic Notation open_constr := idtac". + Also (at least) "ref", "string", "preident", "int" and "ssrpatternarg". + (from reading .v files). + Looks like any string passed to "make0" in the code is valid. But do + we want to support all these? + @JasonGross's opinion here: https://github.com/coq/coq/pull/11718#discussion_r415387421 .. list-table:: :header-rows: 1 @@ -1789,7 +1789,7 @@ Tactic notations allow customizing the syntax of tactics. - :tacn:`unfold` * - ``smart_global`` - - :token:`smart_qualid` + - :token:`reference` - a global reference of term - :tacn:`with_strategy` @@ -1871,7 +1871,7 @@ Tactic notations allow customizing the syntax of tactics. entries can be used in primitive tactics or in other notations at places where a list of the underlying entry can be used: entry is either ``constr``, ``hyp``, - ``integer``, ``smart_qualid``, ``strategy_level``, + ``integer``, ``reference``, ``strategy_level``, ``strategy_level_or_var``, or ``int_or_var``. |
