| Age | Commit message (Collapse) | Author |
|---|
|
In a component-based source code organization of Coq `intf` doesn't
fit very well, as it sits in bit of "limbo" between different
components, and indeed, encourages developers to place types in
sometimes random places wrt the hierarchy. For example, lower parts of
the system reference `Vernacexpr`, which morally lives in a pretty
higher part of the system.
We move all the files in `intf` to the lowest place their dependencies
can accommodate:
- `Misctypes`: is used by Declaremod, thus it has to go in `library`
or below. Ideally, this file would disappear.
- `Evar_kinds`: it is used by files in `engine`, so that seems its
proper placement.
- `Decl_kinds`: used in `library`, seems like the right place. [could
also be merged.
- `Glob_term`: belongs to pretyping, where it is placed.
- `Locus`: ditto.
- `Pattern`: ditto.
- `Genredexpr`: depended by a few modules in `pretyping`, seems like
the righ place.
- `Constrexpr`: used in `pretyping`, the use is a bit unfortunate and
could be fixed, as this module should be declared in `interp` which
is the one eliminating it.
- `Vernacexpr`: same problem than `Constrexpr`; this one can be fixed
as it contains stuff it shouldn't. The right place should be `parsing`.
- `Extend`: Is placed in `pretyping` due to being used by `Vernacexpr`.
- `Notation_term`: First place used is `interp`, seems like the right place.
Additionally, for some files it could be worth to merge files of the
form `Foo` with `Foo_ops` in the medium term, as to create proper ADT
modules as done in the kernel with `Name`, etc...
|
|
|
|
Concretely, we provide "constr as ident", "constr as strict pattern"
and "constr as pattern".
This tells to parse a binder as a constr, restricting to only ident or
to only a strict pattern, or to a pattern which can also be an ident.
The "strict pattern" modifier allows to restrict the use of patterns
in printing rules. This allows e.g. to select the appropriate rule for
printing between {x|P} and {'pat|P}.
|
|
|
|
This allows in particular to define notations with 'pat style binders.
E.g.:
A non-trivial change in this commit is storing binders and patterns
separately from terms.
This is not strictly necessary but has some advantages.
However, it is relatively common to have binders also used as terms,
or binders parsed as terms. Thus, it is already relatively common to
embed binders into terms (see e.g. notation for ETA in output test
Notations3.v) or to coerce terms to idents (see e.g. the notation for
{x|P} where x is parsed as a constr).
So, it is as simple to always store idents (and eventually patterns)
as terms.
|
|
This makes treatment of recursive binders closer to the one of
recursive terms. It is unclear whether there are interesting notations
liable to use this, but this shall make easier mixing recursive
binders and recursive terms as in next commits.
Example of (artificial) notation that this commit supports:
Notation "! x .. y # A #" :=
(.. (A,(forall x, True)) ..,(forall y, True))
(at level 200, x binder).
|
|
|
|
|
|
There is no way today to distinguish primitive projections from
compatibility constants, at least in the case of a record without
parameters.
We remedy to this by always using the r.(p) syntax when printing
primitive projections, even with Set Printing All.
The input syntax r.(p) is still elaborated to GApp, so that we can preserve
the compatibility layer. Hopefully we can make up a plan to get rid of that
layer, but it will require fixing a few problems.
|
|
We do up to `Term` which is the main bulk of the changes.
|
|
This allows to issue a more appropriate message when a notation with a
{ } cannot be defined because of an incompatible level. E.g.:
Notation "{ A } + B" := (sumbool A B) (at level 20).
|
|
- Formerly, notations such as "{ A } + { B }" were typically split
into "{ _ }" and "_ + _". We keep the split only for parsing, which
is where it is really needed, but not anymore for interpretation,
nor printing.
- As a consequence, one notation string can give rise to several
grammar entries, but still only one printing entry.
- As another consequence, "{ A } + { B }" and "A + { B }" must be
reserved to be used, which is after all the natural expectation,
even if the sublevels are constrained.
- We also now keep the information "is ident", "is binder" in the
"key" characterizing the level of a notation.
|
|
Since camlp5 parses from left, the last ", z" was parsed as part of an
arbitrary long list of "x1 , .. , xn" and a syntax error was raised
since an extra ", z" was still expected.
We support this by translating "x , .. , y , z" into "x , y , .. , z"
and reassembling the arguments appropriately after parsing.
|
|
|
|
|
