| Age | Commit message (Collapse) | Author |
|---|
|
The test is refined to handle aliases: i.e. undefined evars coming from
restrictions and evar-evar unifications with an initial evar are not
considered fresh unresolved evars. To check this, we generalize the
restricted_evars set to an aliased_evars set in the evar map,
registering evars being solved by another evar due to restriction
or evar-evar unifications. This implements the proposal of PR #370
for testing the resolution status of evars independently of the evar-evar
orientation order.
This allows [apply] to refine an evar with a new one if it results from a
[clear] request or an evar-evar solution only, otherwise the new evar is
considered fresh and an error is raised.
Also fixes bugs #4095 and #4413.
Co-authored-by: Maxime Dénès <maxime.denes@inria.fr>
|
|
Before this patch, the proof engine had three notions of shelves:
- A local shelf in `proofview`
- A global shelf in `Proof.t`
- A future shelf in `evar_map`
This has lead to a lot of confusion and limitations or bugs, because
some components have only a partial view of the shelf: the pretyper can
see only the future shelf, tactics can see only the local and future
shelves. In particular, this refactoring is needed for #7825.
The solution we choose is to move shelf information to the evar map, as
a shelf stack (for nested `unshelve` tacticals).
Closes #8770.
Closes #6292.
Co-authored-by: Gaëtan Gilbert <gaetan.gilbert@skyskimmer.net>
|
|
|
|
Add headers to a few files which were missing them.
|
|
|
|
|
|
In order to do so we place the polymorphic status and name in the
read-only part of the monad.
Note the added comments, as well as the fact that almost no part of
tactics depends on `proofs` nor `interp`, thus they should be placed
just after pretyping.
Gaëtan Gilbert noted that ideally, abstract should not depend on the
polymorphic status, should we be able to defer closing of the
constant, however this will require significant effort.
Also, we may deprecate nameless abstract, thus rending both of the
changes this PR need unnecessary.
|
|
This should improve correctness and will be needed for the PRs that
remove global access to the proof state.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
