| Age | Commit message (Collapse) | Author |
|---|
|
|
|
Mostly documentation and making a couple of local flags, local.
|
|
|
|
We also remove flushing operations `msg_with`, now the flushing
responsibility belong to the owner of the formatter.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Incidentally, this fixes a printing bug in output/inference.v where the
displayed name of an evar was the wrong one because its type was not
evar-expanded enough.
|
|
|
|
This allows the decoupling of the notions of context containing kernel
terms and context containing tactic-level terms.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The option can be turned on by the user though.
|
|
|
|
It now prints evars with candidates as well if there are any.
|
|
|
|
|
|
which can be useful in general, and then simplifying "Printer.pr_named_decl" function
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
module)
For the moment, there is an Error module in compilers-lib/ocamlbytecomp.cm(x)a
|
|
This allows a work-around for bug #4819,
https://coq.inria.fr/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=4819.
|
|
|
|
along with goals, with nice formatting.
|
|
|
|
|
|
This patch splits pretty printing representation from IO operations.
- `Pp` is kept in charge of the abstract pretty printing representation.
- The `Feedback` module provides interface for doing printing IO.
The patch continues work initiated for 8.5 and has the following effects:
- The following functions in `Pp`: `pp`, `ppnl`, `pperr`, `pperrnl`,
`pperr_flush`, `pp_flush`, `flush_all`, `msg`, `msgnl`, `msgerr`,
`msgerrnl`, `message` are removed. `Feedback.msg_*` functions must be
used instead.
- Feedback provides different backends to handle output, currently,
`stdout`, `emacs` and CoqIDE backends are provided.
- Clients cannot specify flush policy anymore, thus `pp_flush` et al are
gone.
- `Feedback.feedback` takes an `edit_or_state_id` instead of the old
mix.
Lightly tested: Test-suite passes, Proof General and CoqIDE seem to work.
|
|
Return the most appropriate evar_map for commands that can run on
non-focused proofs (like Check, Show and debug printers) so that
universes and existentials are printed correctly (they are global
to the proof). The API is backwards compatible.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
aspiwack-linear-comparison
Fixing a -1 -> +1 typo
|
|
|
|
Return an evar_map with the right universes, when there are no focused
subgoals or the proof is finished.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The current solution may not be totally ideal though. We generate names for
anonymous evars on the fly at printing time, based on the Evar_kind data they
are wearing. This means in particular that the printed name of an anonymous
evar may change in the future because some unrelate evar has been solved or
introduced.
|
|
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.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
