| Age | Commit message (Collapse) | Author |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
This particular instance is probably never called though.
|
|
The core is a "detyping" function for [closed_glob_constr]. Which interpretes the variable names according to the Ltac context, and apply the standard detyping procedure to typed terms in the closure.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
They should be rather sensible, but de gustibus & coloribus...
|
|
|
|
reference" and "simpl pattern" in the code (maybe we should have
merged them instead, but I finally decided to enforce their
difference, even if some compatibility is to be preversed - the idea
is that at some time "simpl reference" would only call a weak-head
simpl (or eventually cbn), leading e.g. to reduce 2+n into S(1+n)
rather than S(S(n)) which could be useful for better using induction
hypotheses.
In the process we also implement the following:
- 'simpl "+"' is accepted to reduce all applicative subterms whose
head symbol is written "+" (in the toplevel scope); idem for
vm_compute and native_compute
- 'simpl reference' works even if reference has maximally inserted
implicit arguments (this solves the "simpl fst" incompatibility)
- compatibility of ltac expressions referring to vm_compute and
native_compute with functor application should now work (i.e.
vm_compute and native_compute are now taken into account in
tacsubst.ml)
- for compatibility, "simpl eq" (assuming no maximal implicit args in
eq) or "simpl @eq" to mean "simpl (eq _ _)" are still allowed.
By the way, is "mul" on nat defined optimally? "3*n" simplifies to
"n+(n+(n+0))". Are there some advantages of this compared to have it
simplified to "n+n+n" (i.e. to "(n+n)+n").
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
printing/RichPrinter: Rename into Richprinter.
printing/{ppvernac, ppconstr, pptactic}: Rename RichPp into Richpp.
printing/Richprinter: Cosmetics.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
printing/Pptactic: Tag tactics pretty-printing.
printing/Ppvernac: Use the relevent Pptactic pretty-printer.
printing/RichPrinter: Publish two new services.
|
|
- Functorize with respect to the pretty-printer for constr.
- Include the application of Make to Ppconstr at toplevel in order to preserve
previous behavior.
|
|
printing/Pptactic: Use it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
A combinator to introduce tags.
printing/{Ppconstr, Ppvernac}: Use it.
|
|
printing/{Ppconstr, Ppvernac}: Use it.
|
|
|
|
printing/Ppannotation: Define the projection of annotations into XML attributes.
lib/richPp: Implements valid entities escaping.
|
|
Ppconstr: Fix a typo in comments.
|
|
Ppvernac.RichPp: New rich pretty-printer.
|
|
- Define the signature for a pretty-printer of vernacular commands.
Ppvernac: Use it.
|
|
- Ppvernac is now functorized with respect to
a Ppconstr printer.
- Preserve previous behavior by instantiating this functor
with Ppconstr.
|
|
|
|
Define the annotations stored in semi-structured pretty-prints.
Ppconstrsig: New.
Contains the signature of a pretty-printer for ppconstr.
Ppconstr: Export a new rich pretty-printer for constr_expr and co.
|
|
- Functorize Ppconstr with respect to a set of tagging functions.
- These functions are meant to introduce tags to produce semistructured
pretty printings.
printing/Ppconstr:
Preserve the previous behaviour of this module by instantiating Make
with tagging functions that do nothing.
|
|
Make evaluation order explicit.
(Do not rely anymore on ocaml evaluation order, which is unspecified.)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Re-add, in fact, since it was there in v8.3 but was dead code in v8.4 hence was deleted. It is necessary for printing info traces, however. A lot of the code had changed since v8.3, so adapting the code was non-trivial and some thing may be printed wrong.
It require re-adding a [tacexpr] argument to [gen_tactic_expr]. It had been made obsolete by the deletion of [pr_tactic] in v8.4 (even though printing [glob_tactic_expr] in a [tactic_expr] is only an approximation of the appropriate behaviour).
A new kind of argument, [delayed_constr], has made an appearance between v8.4 and trunk, and it differs from [constr] in the typed level. So it required its own parameter in [gen_tactic_expr]. At this point [delayed_constr] are printed in the globalised level because they are interpreted as closures. Maybe a better approximation is warranted.
Both in the printing of rewrite and induction, I changed a [pr_lconstr] (note the 'l') by a [pr_dconstr]. It is probably not quite correct, and may need fixing (adding a [pr_dlconstr] to [Pptactics] I guess?).
|
|
The name is chosen in accordance to Ltac's syntax. In particular [refine] prints as Ltac's refine, which is not entirely correct (Ltac's refine does some βι-reduction after refinement). Maybe it would be better to give make it clear that it is a different refine. Still in refine, the constr is printed without taking into account the new evars, which, apart from potentially getting the order of the goals wrong, prints new evars as ?x instead of ?[x]. A printer for terms with new evars will be necessary.
In the case of [V82.tactic], the name is just <unknown> because there is no way to retrieve any information. It won't appear in the first level of info in Ltac, however, if the user would require a deeper trace, he may see internal tactics (Tactics defined with TACTIC EXTEND also have weird, unparsable, internal names).
|
|
Called with [Info n tac], runs [tac] and prints its info trace unfolding [n] level of tactic names ([0] for no unfolding at all).
|
|
The main change is that selection of subterm is made similar whether
the given term is fully applied or not.
- The selection of subterm now works as follows depending on whether
the "at" is given, of whether the subterm is fully applied or not,
and whether there are incompatible subterms matching the pattern. In
particular, we have:
"at" given
| subterm fully applied
| | incompatible subterms
| | |
Y Y - it works like in 8.4
Y N - this was broken in 8.4 ("at" was ineffective and it was finding
all subterms syntactically equal to the first one which matches)
N Y Y it now finds all subterms like the first one which matches
while in 8.4 it used to fail (I hope it is not a too risky in-draft
for a semantics we would regret...) (e.g. "destruct (S _)" on
goal "S x = S y + S x" now selects the two occurrences of "S x"
while it was failing before)
N Y N it works like in 8.4
N N - it works like in 8.4, selecting all subterms like the
first one which matches
- Note that the "historical" semantics, when looking for a subterm, to
select all subterms that syntactically match the first subterm to
match the pattern (looking from left to right) is now internally called
"like first".
- Selection of subterms can now find the type by pattern-matching (useful e.g.
for "induction (nat_rect _ _ _ _)")
- A version of Unification.w_unify w/o any conversion is used for
finding the subterm: it could be easily replaced by an other
matching algorithm.
In particular, "destruct H" now works on a goal such as "H:True -> x<=y |- P y".
Secondary change is in the interpretation of terms with existential
variables:
- When several arguments are given, interpretation is delayed at the
time of execution
- Because we aim at eventually accepting "edestruct c" with unresolved
holes in c, we need the sigma obtained from c to be an extension of
the sigma of the tactics, while before, we just type-checked c
independently of the sigma of the tactic
- Finishing the resolution of evars (using type classes, candidates,
pending conversion problems) is made slightly cleaner: it now takes
three states: a term is evaluated in state sigma, leading to state
sigma' >= sigma, with evars finally solved in state sigma'' >=
sigma'; we solve evars in the diff of sigma' and sigma and report
the solution in sigma''
- We however renounce to give now a success semantics to "edestruct c"
when "c" has unresolved holes, waiting instead for a decision on
what to do in the case of a similar eapply (see mail to coqdev).
An auxiliary change is that an "in" clause can be attached to each component
of a "destruct t, u, v", etc.
Incidentally, make_abstraction does not do evar resolution itself any longer.
|
|
coqide to coqtop.
(Joint work with Pierre)
|