| Age | Commit message (Collapse) | Author |
|---|
|
This commit removes from the source tree plugins/decl_mode,
its chapter in the reference manual and related tests.
|
|
module)
For the moment, there is an Error module in compilers-lib/ocamlbytecomp.cm(x)a
|
|
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.
|
|
|
|
It will not work in CoqIDE though, which handles printing its own way. It's a general remark that we have many ways of printing things in Coq and we should look for a unified structured framework to be shared between interfaces.
|
|
subproofs.
The front-end is supposed to take care of that, but it may help to catch bugs.
|
|
|
|
I had previously mistakenly enforced the property that after solving every goal in a block, unfocusing was performed automatically until one goal is in focus. This is not how the declarative mode is supposed to behave. Rather every focus must be explicitely unfocused by a closing command.
This hit a few bad interaction with the pure representation of proof introduced for the asynchronous processing.
Some of the invariants seem fragile, so this minimally disruptive solution is probably not long-term. In particular since each block uses the same focus kind, an `end <block>` may close another block than intended if the number of unfocussing command executed is not the right one.
|
|
|
|
It is highlighted in yellow in Coqide.
The unsafe status is tracked throughout the execution of tactics such that
nested calls to admit are caught.
Many function (mainly those building constr with tactics such as typeclass
related stuff, and Function, and a few other like eauto's use of Hint Extern)
drop the unsafe status. This is unfortunate, but a lot of refactoring would
be in order.
git-svn-id: svn+ssh://scm.gforge.inria.fr/svn/coq/trunk@16977 85f007b7-540e-0410-9357-904b9bb8a0f7
|
|
git-svn-id: svn+ssh://scm.gforge.inria.fr/svn/coq/trunk@16806 85f007b7-540e-0410-9357-904b9bb8a0f7
|
|
The process_transaction function adds a new edge to the Dag without
executing the transaction (when possible).
The observe id function runs the transactions necessary to reach to the
state id. Transaction being on a merged branch are not executed but
stored into a future.
The finish function calls observe on the tip of the current branch.
Imperative modifications to the environment made by some tactics are
now explicitly declared by the tactic and modeled as let-in/beta-redexes
at the root of the proof term. An example is the abstract tactic.
This is the work described in the Coq Workshop 2012 paper.
Coq is compile with thread support from now on.
git-svn-id: svn+ssh://scm.gforge.inria.fr/svn/coq/trunk@16674 85f007b7-540e-0410-9357-904b9bb8a0f7
|
|
git-svn-id: svn+ssh://scm.gforge.inria.fr/svn/coq/trunk@16281 85f007b7-540e-0410-9357-904b9bb8a0f7
|
|
**Warning** the ml code of plugins may have to be adapted after this.
Concerning coq itself, I've done the adaptations, let's hope I've
forgotten none. In practice, the number of changes are relatively low,
and the code is quite cleaner this way.
git-svn-id: svn+ssh://scm.gforge.inria.fr/svn/coq/trunk@16271 85f007b7-540e-0410-9357-904b9bb8a0f7
|
|
functor application. Rewritten the interface btw.
git-svn-id: svn+ssh://scm.gforge.inria.fr/svn/coq/trunk@16267 85f007b7-540e-0410-9357-904b9bb8a0f7
|
|
git-svn-id: svn+ssh://scm.gforge.inria.fr/svn/coq/trunk@16071 85f007b7-540e-0410-9357-904b9bb8a0f7
|
|
git-svn-id: svn+ssh://scm.gforge.inria.fr/svn/coq/trunk@15844 85f007b7-540e-0410-9357-904b9bb8a0f7
|
|
git-svn-id: svn+ssh://scm.gforge.inria.fr/svn/coq/trunk@15715 85f007b7-540e-0410-9357-904b9bb8a0f7
|
|
Util only depends on Ocaml stdlib and Utf8 tables.
Generic pretty printing and loc functions are in Pp.
Generic errors are in Errors.
+ Training white-spaces, useless open, prlist copies random erasure.
Too many "open Errors" on the contrary.
git-svn-id: svn+ssh://scm.gforge.inria.fr/svn/coq/trunk@15020 85f007b7-540e-0410-9357-904b9bb8a0f7
|
|
Everything seems to work fine in CoqIDE (except escape/return and the daimon which are not entirely ported).
However, there is some problem causing proof general to fail when using goto or evaluate buffer (evaluate next phrase works fine though), as well as coqc.
git-svn-id: svn+ssh://scm.gforge.inria.fr/svn/coq/trunk@13817 85f007b7-540e-0410-9357-904b9bb8a0f7
|
|
git-svn-id: svn+ssh://scm.gforge.inria.fr/svn/coq/trunk@13323 85f007b7-540e-0410-9357-904b9bb8a0f7
|
|
- Many of them were broken, some of them after Pierre B's rework
of mli for ocamldoc, but not only (many bad annotation, many files
with no svn property about Id, etc)
- Useless for those of us that work with git-svn (and a fortiori
in a forthcoming git-only setting)
- Even in svn, they seem to be of little interest
git-svn-id: svn+ssh://scm.gforge.inria.fr/svn/coq/trunk@12972 85f007b7-540e-0410-9357-904b9bb8a0f7
|
|
This is a fairly large commit (around 140 files and 7000 lines of code
impacted), it will cause some troubles for sure (I've listed the know
regressions below, there is bound to be more).
At this state of developpement it brings few features to the user, as
the old tactics were
ported with no change. Changes are on the side of the developer mostly.
Here comes a list of the major changes. I will stay brief, but the code
is hopefully well documented so that it is reasonably easy to infer the
details from it.
Feature developer-side:
* Primitives for a "real" refine tactic (generating a goal for each
evar).
* Abstract type of tactics, goals and proofs
* Tactics can act on several goals (formally all the focused goals). An
interesting consequence of this is that the tactical (. ; [ . | ... ])
can be separated in two
tacticals (. ; .) and ( [ . | ... ] ) (although there is a conflict for
this particular syntax). We can also imagine a tactic to reorder the
goals.
* Possibility for a tactic to pass a value to following tactics (a
typical example is
an intro function which tells the following tactics which name it
introduced).
* backtracking primitives for tactics (it is now possible to implement a
tactical '+'
with (a+b);c equivalent to (a;c+b;c) (itself equivalent to
(a;c||b;c)). This is a valuable
tool to implement tactics like "auto" without nowing of the
implementation of tactics.
* A notion of proof modes, which allows to dynamically change the parser
for tactics. It is controlled at user level with the keywords Set
Default Proof Mode (this is the proof mode which is loaded at the start
of each proof) and Proof Mode (switches the proof mode of the current
proof) to control them.
* A new primitive Evd.fold_undefined which operates like an Evd.fold,
except it only goes through the evars whose body is Evar_empty. This is
a common operation throughout the code,
some of the fold-and-test-if-empty occurences have been replaced by
fold_undefined. For now,
it is only implemented as a fold-and-test, but we expect to have some
optimisations coming some day, as there can be a lot of evars in an
evar_map with this new implementation (I've observed a couple of
thousands), whereas there are rarely more than a dozen undefined ones.
Folding being a linear operation, this might result in a significant
speed-up.
* The declarative mode has been moved into the plugins. This is made
possible by the proof mode feature. I tried to document it so that it
can serve as a tutorial for a tactic mode plugin.
Features user-side:
* Unfocus does not go back to the root of the proof if several Focus-s
have been performed.
It only goes back to the point where it was last focused.
* experimental (non-documented) support of keywords
BeginSubproof/EndSubproof:
BeginSubproof focuses on first goal, one can unfocus only with
EndSubproof, and only
if the proof is completed for that goal.
* experimental (non-documented) support for bullets ('+', '-' and '*')
they act as hierarchical BeginSubproof/EndSubproof:
First time one uses '+' (for instance) it focuses on first goal, when
the subproof is
completed, one can use '+' again which unfocuses and focuses on next
first goal.
Meanwhile, one cas use '*' (for instance) to focus more deeply.
Known regressions:
* The xml plugin had some functions related to proof trees. As the
structure of proof changed significantly, they do not work anymore.
* I do not know how to implement info or show script in this new engine.
Actually I don't even know what they were suppose to actually mean in
earlier versions either. I wager they would require some calm thinking
before going back to work.
* Declarative mode not entirely working (in particular proofs by
induction need to be restored).
* A bug in the inversion tactic (observed in some contributions)
* A bug in Program (observed in some contributions)
* Minor change in the 'old' type of tactics causing some contributions
to fail.
* Compilation time takes about 10-15% longer for unknown reasons (I
suspect it might be linked to the fact that I don't perform any
reduction at QED-s, and also to some linear operations on evar_map-s
(see Evd.fold_undefined above)).
git-svn-id: svn+ssh://scm.gforge.inria.fr/svn/coq/trunk@12961 85f007b7-540e-0410-9357-904b9bb8a0f7
|
