| Age | Commit message (Collapse) | Author |
|---|
|
Prevent errors when under annotating binders.
|
|
Kernel should be mostly correct, higher levels do random stuff at
times.
|
|
It used to simply remember the normal form of the type of the constructor.
This is somewhat problematic as this is ambiguous in presence of
let-bindings. Rather, we store this data in a fully expanded way, relying
on rel_contexts.
Probably fixes a crapload of bugs with inductive types containing
let-bindings, but it seems that not many were reported in the bugtracker.
|
|
I think the usage looks cleaner this way.
|
|
This work makes it possible to take advantage of a compact
representation for integers in the entire system, as opposed to only
in some reduction machines. It is useful for heavily computational
applications, where even constructing terms is not possible without such
a representation.
Concretely, it replaces part of the retroknowledge machinery with
a primitive construction for integers in terms, and introduces a kind of
FFI which maps constants to operators (on integers). Properties of these
operators are expressed as explicit axioms, whereas they were hidden in
the retroknowledge-based approach.
This has been presented at the Coq workshop and some Coq Working Groups,
and has been used by various groups for STM trace checking,
computational analysis, etc.
Contributions by Guillaume Bertholon and Pierre Roux <Pierre.Roux@onera.fr>
Co-authored-by: Benjamin Grégoire <Benjamin.Gregoire@inria.fr>
Co-authored-by: Vincent Laporte <Vincent.Laporte@fondation-inria.fr>
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The kernel no longer has to read the configure flag, its value can now
be overriden by a coqtop/coqc argument, and more generally is easier to
set from a toplevel (such as the checker).
We also add a `-bytecode-compiler` flag.
Fixes #4607
|
|
This is a partial resurrection of #6423 but only for the kernel.
IMHO, we pay a bit of price for this but it is a good safety
measure.
Only warning "4: fragile pattern matching" and "44: open hides a type"
are disabled.
We would like to enable 44 for sure once we do some alias cleanup.
|
|
|
|
We move the global declaration of that argument to the environment, and reuse
the Global module to handle this flag.
Note that the checker was not using this flag before this patch, and still
doesn't use it. This should probably be fixed in a later patch.
|
|
The upper layers still need a mapping constant -> projection, which is
provided by Recordops.
|
|
We simply exploit a type isomorphism to remove the use of dedicated algebraic
types in the kernel which are actually not necessary.
|
|
This brings more compatibility with handling of mutual primitive records
in the kernel.
|
|
This is a first step towards the acceptance of mutual record types in the
kernel.
|
|
This was completely wrong, such a term could not even be type-checked by
the kernel as it was internally using a match construct over a negative
record. They were luckily only used in upper layers, namley printing
and extraction.
Recomputing the projection body might be costly in detyping, but this only
happens when the compatibility flag is turned on, which is not the default.
Such flag is probably bound to disappear anyways.
Extraction should be fixed though so as to define directly primitive
projections, similarly to what has been done in native compute.
|
|
This field used to signal that a constant was the compatibility
eta-expansion of a primitive projections, but since a previous cleanup in
the kernel it had become useless.
|
|
Instead of having the projection data in the constant data we have it
independently in the environment.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
We also have to update the checker to deserialize this additional data,
but it is not using it in type-checking yet.
|
|
Also use constant_universes_entry instead of a bool flag to indicate
polymorphism in ParameterEntry.
There are a few places where we convert back to ContextSet because
check_univ_decl returns a UContext, this could be improved.
|
|
We do up to `Term` which is the main bulk of the changes.
|
|
This will allow to merge back `Names` with `API.Names`
|
|
As explained in edf85b9, the original commit that merged the module_body
and module_type_body representations, this was delayed to a later time
assumedly due to OCaml lack of GADTs. Actually, the only thing that was
needed was polymorphic recursion, which has been around already for a
relatively long time (since 3.12).
|
|
The use of template polymorphism in constants was quite limited, as it
only applied to definitions that were exactly inductive types without any
parameter whatsoever. Furthermore, it seems that following the introduction
of polymorphic definitions, the code path enforced regular polymorphism as
soon as the type of a definition was given, which was in practice almost
always.
Removing this feature had no observable effect neither on the test-suite,
nor on any development that we monitor on Travis. I believe it is safe to
assume it was nowadays useless.
|
|
|
|
Instead of returning either an instance or the set of constraints, we rather
return the corresponding abstracted context. We also push back all uses of
abstraction-breaking calls from these functions out of the kernel.
|
|
|
|
|
|
These functions were messing with the deferred universe constraints in an
error-prone way, and were only used for printing as of today. We inline
the one used by the printer instead.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Except I have disabled the minimization of universes after sections as
it seems to interfere with the STM machinery causing files like
test-suite/vio/print.v to loop when processed asynchronously.
This is very peculiar and needs more investigation as the aforementioned
file does not have any sections or any universe polymorphic definitions!
commit fc785326080b9451eb4700b16ccd3f7df214e0ed
Author: Amin Timany <amintimany@gmail.com>
Date: Mon Apr 24 17:14:21 2017 +0200
Revert STL to monomorphic
commit 62b573fb13d290d8fe4c85822da62d3e5e2a6996
Author: Amin Timany <amintimany@gmail.com>
Date: Mon Apr 24 17:02:42 2017 +0200
Try unifying universes before apply subtyping
commit ff393742c37b9241c83498e84c2274967a1a58dc
Author: Amin Timany <amintimany@gmail.com>
Date: Sun Apr 23 13:49:04 2017 +0200
Compile more of STL with universe polymorphism
commit 5c831b41ebd1fc32e2dd976697c8e474f48580d6
Author: Amin Timany <amintimany@gmail.com>
Date: Tue Apr 18 21:26:45 2017 +0200
Made more progress on compiling the standard library
commit b8550ffcce0861794116eb3b12b84e1158c2b4f8
Author: Amin Timany <amintimany@gmail.com>
Date: Sun Apr 16 22:55:19 2017 +0200
Make more number theoretic modules monomorphic
commit 29d126d4d4910683f7e6aada2a25209151e41b10
Author: Amin Timany <amintimany@gmail.com>
Date: Fri Apr 14 16:11:48 2017 +0200
WIP more of standard library compiles
Also: Matthieu fixed a bug in rewrite system which was faulty when
introducing new morphisms (Add Morphism) command.
commit 23bc33b843f098acaba4c63c71c68f79c4641f8c
Author: Amin Timany <amintimany@gmail.com>
Date: Fri Apr 14 11:39:21 2017 +0200
WIP: more of the standard library compiles
We have implemented convertibility of constructors up-to mutual
subtyping of their corresponding inductive types. This is similar to
the behavior of template polymorphism.
commit d0abc5c50d593404fb41b98d588c3843382afd4f
Author: Amin Timany <amintimany@gmail.com>
Date: Wed Apr 12 19:02:39 2017 +0200
WIP: trying to get the standard library compile with universe polymorphism
We are trying to prune universes after section ends. Sections add a
load of universes that are not appearing in the body, type or the
constraints.
|
|
It stores both universe constraints and subtyping information for
blocks of inductive declarations.
At this stage the there is no inference or checking implemented. The
subtyping information simply encodes equality of levels for the condition of
subtyping.
|
|
|
|
composition operator.
Short story:
This pull-request:
(1) removes the definition of the "right-to-left" function composition operator
(2) adds the definition of the "left-to-right" function composition operator
(3) rewrites the code relying on "right-to-left" function composition to rely on "left-to-right" function composition operator instead.
Long story:
In mathematics, function composition is traditionally denoted with ∘ operator.
Ocaml standard library does not provide analogous operator under any name.
Batteries Included provides provides two alternatives:
_ % _
and
_ %> _
The first operator one corresponds to the classical ∘ operator routinely used in mathematics.
I.e.:
(f4 % f3 % f2 % f1) x ≜ (f4 ∘ f3 ∘ f2 ∘ f1) x
We can call it "right-to-left" composition because:
- the function we write as first (f4) will be called as last
- and the function write as last (f1) will be called as first.
The meaning of the second operator is this:
(f1 %> f2 %> f3 %> f4) x ≜ (f4 ∘ f3 ∘ f2 ∘ f1) x
We can call it "left-to-right" composition because:
- the function we write as first (f1) will be called first
- and the function we write as last (f4) will be called last
That is, the functions are written in the same order in which we write and read them.
I think that it makes sense to prefer the "left-to-right" variant because
it enables us to write functions in the same order in which they will be actually called
and it thus better fits our culture
(we read/write from left to right).
|
|
mainly concerning referring to "Context.{Rel,Named}.get_{id,value,type}" functions.
If multiple modules define a function with a same name, e.g.:
Context.{Rel,Named}.get_type
those calls were prefixed with a corresponding prefix
to make sure that it is obvious which function is being called.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The rational is that
1. further typing flags may be available in the future
2. it makes it easier to trace and document the argument
|
|
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
|
|
Originally, rel-context was represented as:
Context.rel_context = Names.Name.t * Constr.t option * Constr.t
Now it is represented as:
Context.Rel.t = LocalAssum of Names.Name.t * Constr.t
| LocalDef of Names.Name.t * Constr.t * Constr.t
Originally, named-context was represented as:
Context.named_context = Names.Id.t * Constr.t option * Constr.t
Now it is represented as:
Context.Named.t = LocalAssum of Names.Id.t * Constr.t
| LocalDef of Names.Id.t * Constr.t * Constr.t
Motivation:
(1) In "tactics/hipattern.ml4" file we define "test_strict_disjunction"
function which looked like this:
let test_strict_disjunction n lc =
Array.for_all_i (fun i c ->
match (prod_assum (snd (decompose_prod_n_assum n c))) with
| [_,None,c] -> isRel c && Int.equal (destRel c) (n - i)
| _ -> false) 0 lc
Suppose that you do not know about rel-context and named-context.
(that is the case of people who just started to read the source code)
Merlin would tell you that the type of the value you are destructing
by "match" is:
'a * 'b option * Constr.t (* worst-case scenario *)
or
Named.Name.t * Constr.t option * Constr.t (* best-case scenario (?) *)
To me, this is akin to wearing an opaque veil.
It is hard to figure out the meaning of the values you are looking at.
In particular, it is hard to discover the connection between the value
we are destructing above and the datatypes and functions defined
in the "kernel/context.ml" file.
In this case, the connection is there, but it is not visible
(between the function above and the "Context" module).
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Now consider, what happens when the reader see the same function
presented in the following form:
let test_strict_disjunction n lc =
Array.for_all_i (fun i c ->
match (prod_assum (snd (decompose_prod_n_assum n c))) with
| [LocalAssum (_,c)] -> isRel c && Int.equal (destRel c) (n - i)
| _ -> false) 0 lc
If the reader haven't seen "LocalAssum" before, (s)he can use Merlin
to jump to the corresponding definition and learn more.
In this case, the connection is there, and it is directly visible
(between the function above and the "Context" module).
(2) Also, if we already have the concepts such as:
- local declaration
- local assumption
- local definition
and we describe these notions meticulously in the Reference Manual,
then it is a real pity not to reinforce the connection
of the actual code with the abstract description we published.
|
|
|
