| Age | Commit message (Collapse) | Author |
|---|
|
As of today Coq has the `CProfile` infrastructure disabled by default,
untested, and not easily accessible.
It was decided that `CProfile` should remain not user-accessible, and
only available thus by manual editing of Coq code to switch the flag
and manually instrument functions.
We thus remove all bitrotten dead code.
|
|
ssreflect asks setoid rewrite to rewrite in goal
"forall_special_name_ : T, _other_name_"
Since this is a non dependent product, setoid rewrite converts that to
"impl T _other_name_" and must be taught to restore the special name
when unfolding impl.
|
|
We store bound variable names instead of functions for both branches and
predicate, and we furthermore add the parameters in the node. Let bindings
are not taken into account and require an environment lookup for retrieval.
|
|
We additionally check that occurrence 0 is invalid in simpl at,
unfold at, etc.
|
|
(hopefully)
Reviewed-by: ppedrot
|
|
Reviewed-by: ppedrot
|
|
Fix #13246
Not sure if this is the right thing to do, but it seems to work.
|
|
Ltac variables were not yet supported.
|
|
Reviewed-by: SkySkimmer
Ack-by: gares
Ack-by: ejgallego
|
|
|
|
lambda
Reviewed-by: ppedrot
|
|
This allows to quickly spot the parts of the code that rely on the canonical
ordering. When possible we directly introduce the quotient-aware versions.
|
|
Reviewed-by: ppedrot
|
|
Fix #13129
|
|
Remove unused arguments and commented code
|
|
Fix #13045
Also make sure future anomalies won't be fed to tclzero.
Instead of retyping with lax:true we may question why we produce an
ill-typed term in decompose_app_rel: in the
| App (f, [|arg|]) ->
case we produce `fun x y : T => bla x y` but we have no assurance that
the second argument of `bla` should have type `T`.
|
|
|
|
|
|
This is a follow-up of #9062, which introduced a discrenpancy between
the two unification engines.
|
|
|
|
|
|
We unify information about constants so it is shared among all the
paths [interactive, NI, obligations].
IMHO the current setup looks pretty good, with information split into
a per-constant record `CInfo.t` and variables affecting mutual
definitions at once, which live in `Info.t`.
Main information outside our `Info` record is `opaque`, which is
provided at different moments in several cases.
There are a few nits regarding interactive proofs, which will go away
in the next commits.
|
|
This is in preparation for the next commit which will clean-up the
current API flow in `Declare`.
|
|
|
|
|
|
This improves the interface, and allows even more sealing of the API.
This is yet work in progress.
|
|
The module is now a stub. We choose to be explicit on the parameters
for now, this will improve in next commits with the refactoring of
proof / constant information.
|
|
At this point the record in lemmas was just a stub; next commit will
stop exposing the internals of mutual information, and pave the way
for the refactoring of `Info.t` handling in the Declare interface.
|
|
Current backtraces for tactics leave a bit to desire, for example
given the program:
```coq
Lemma u n : n + 0 = n.
rewrite plus_O_n.
```
the backtrace stops at:
```
Found no subterm matching "0 + ?M160" in the current goal.
Called from file "proofs/proof.ml", line 381, characters 4-42
Called from file "tactics/pfedit.ml", line 102, characters 31-58
Called from file "plugins/ltac/g_ltac.mlg", line 378, characters 8-84
```
Backtrace information `?info` is as of today optional in some tactics,
such as `tclZERO`, it doesn't cost a lot however to reify backtrace
information indeed in `tclZERO` and provide backtraces for all tactic
errors. The cost should be small if we are not in debug mode.
The backtrace for the failed rewrite is now:
```
Found no subterm matching "0 + ?M160" in the current goal.
Raised at file "pretyping/unification.ml", line 1827, characters 14-73
Called from file "pretyping/unification.ml", line 1929, characters 17-53
Called from file "pretyping/unification.ml", line 1948, characters 22-72
Called from file "pretyping/unification.ml", line 2020, characters 14-56
Re-raised at file "pretyping/unification.ml", line 2021, characters 66-73
Called from file "proofs/clenv.ml", line 254, characters 12-58
Called from file "proofs/clenvtac.ml", line 95, characters 16-53
Called from file "engine/proofview.ml", line 1110, characters 40-46
Called from file "engine/proofview.ml", line 1115, characters 10-34
Re-raised at file "clib/exninfo.ml", line 82, characters 4-38
Called from file "proofs/proof.ml", line 381, characters 4-42
Called from file "tactics/pfedit.ml", line 102, characters 31-58
Called from file "plugins/ltac/g_ltac.mlg", line 378, characters 8-84
```
which IMO is much better.
|
|
This is extracted from #9710, where we need the environment anyway to compute
iota rules on inductive types with let-bindings. The commit is self-contained,
so I think it could go directly in to save me a few rebases.
Furthermore, this is also related to #11707. Assuming we split cbn from the
other reduction machine, this allows to merge the "local" machine with
the general one, since after this PR they will have the same type. One less
reduction machine should make people happy.
|
|
The API in `DeclareDef` should become the recommended API in `Declare`.
This greatly reduces the exposure of internals; we still have a large
offender in `Lemmas` but that will be taken care of in the next
commit; effectively removing quite some chunks from `declare.mli`.
This PR originally introduced a dependency cycle due to:
- `Declare`: uses `Vernacexpr.decl_notation list`
- `Vernacexpr`: uses `ComHint.hint_expr`
- `ComHint`: uses `Declare.declare_constant`
This is a real cycle in the sense that `ComHint` would have also move
to `DeclareDef` in the medium term.
There were quite a few ways to solve it, we have chosen to
move the hints ast to `Vernacexpr` as it is not very invasive
and seems consistent with the current style.
Alternatives, which could be considered at a later stage are for
example moving the notations AST to `Metasyntax`, having `Declare` not
to depend on `Vernacexpr` [which seems actually a good thing to do in
the medium term], reworking notation support more deeply...
|
|
|
|
Ack-by: SkySkimmer
Reviewed-by: maximedenes
|
|
Reviewed-by: SkySkimmer
Ack-by: herbelin
Reviewed-by: ppedrot
|
|
If we remove all the legacy proof engine stuff, that would remove the
need for the view on proof almost entirely.
|
|
This corresponds more naturally to the use we make of them, as we don't need
fast indexation but we instead keep pushing terms on top of them.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reviewed-by: ejgallego
Reviewed-by: ppedrot
|
|
Add headers to a few files which were missing them.
|
|
|
|
Instead of various termops and globnames aliases.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
There are no users in Coq but maybe some plugin wants it so don't
completely remove it
|
|
Some calls are actually guarded by a check that the scheme is already in
the cache. There is no reason to generate dummy side-effects in that case.
|
|
The proposed replacements are not satisfying because they are more
complicated to use. Following the discussion in #8713, we decide to
remove the deprecation warning for these commands.
|
