| Age | Commit message (Collapse) | Author |
|---|
|
This type was actually only used by the debug printer of tactics, and only
for atomic tactics. Furthermore, that type was asymmetric, as the underlying
tacexpr type was set to be glob_tactic, when the semantics would have required
a Val.t type.
Furthermore, this type is absent from every contrib I have seen, which hints
again in favour of its lack of meaning.
|
|
|
|
|
|
hintbases so that it does not put extra space when auto is defined as
a TACTIC EXTEND.
|
|
|
|
|
|
be used in the generic printer for tactics.
Allows e.g. to print "symmetry in H" correctly after its move to
TACTIC EXTEND.
|
|
This is not perfect yet, in particular the whole precedence system is a real
mess, as there is a real need for tidying up the Pptactic implementation.
Nonetheless, printing toplevel values is only used for debugging purposes, where
an ugly display is better than none at all.
|
|
|
|
into JasonGross-trunk-function_scope
|
|
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.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
E.g., Inductive foo := mkFoo { bla : foo } allowed to define recursive
records with eta for which conversion is incomplete.
- Eta-conversion only applies to BiFinite inductives
- Finiteness information is now checked by the kernel (the constructor types
must be strictly non recursive for BiFinite declarations).
|
|
|
|
|
|
This was redundant with the wit_uconstr generic argument, so there was no real
point on keeping it there.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
This was historically used together with the <:tactic< ... >> quotation to insert
foreign code as $foo, but it actually only survived in the implementation of Tauto.
With the removal of the quotation feature, this is now totally obsolete.
|
|
The glob_expr was actually always embedded as a VFun, so this patch should
not change anything semantically. The only change occurs in the plugin API
where one should use the Tacinterp.tactic_of_value function instead of
Tacinterp.eval_tactic.
Moreover, this patch allows to use tactics returning arguments from the ML
side.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
|
|
|
Fixpoint/Definition.
|
|
|
|
The length of the pattern should now be exactly the number of
assumptions and definitions introduced by the destruction or induction,
including the induction hypotheses in case of an induction.
Like for pattern-matching, the local definitions in the argument of
the constructor can be skipped in which case a name is automatically
created for these.
|
|
|
|
|
|
This will allow an easier landing of the rewriting of Genarg.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
