aboutsummaryrefslogtreecommitdiff
path: root/tactics/tacintern.ml
AgeCommit message (Collapse)Author
2016-01-20Update copyright headers.Maxime Dénès
2015-12-02Dead code from August 2014 in apply in.Hugo Herbelin
2015-06-23Fixing incompatibility introduced with simpl in commit 364decf59c1 (orHugo Herbelin
maybe ca71714). Goal 2=2+2. match goal with |- (_ = ?c) => simpl c end. was working in 8.4 but was failing in 8.5beta2. Note: Changes in tacintern.ml are otherwise purely cosmetic.
2015-05-15Granting wish #4048: Locate Ltac prints the source of redefined Ltac.Pierre-Marie Pédrot
2015-02-27Removing the unused field ltacrecvars of tactic internalization.Pierre-Marie Pédrot
2015-01-12Update headers.Maxime Dénès
2014-12-23A global [gfail] tactic which works like [fail] except that it fails even if ↵Arnaud Spiwack
there is no focused goal. The 'g' is for "global". The arguments are the same as [fail]. Beware: [let x := constr:… in tac] is a goal-local operation regardless of whether [tac] is goal-local or not.
2014-12-12Add Ltac syntax for the [tclIFCATCH] primitive.Arnaud Spiwack
[tryif t then t2 else t3] behaves like [t;t2] if [t] has at least one success, or [t3] otherwise. It generalises [t||t3] as failures from [t2] will not be caught.
2014-12-12Extend the syntax of simpl with a delta flag.Arnaud Spiwack
You can write 'simpl -[plus minus] div2'. Simpl does not use it for now.
2014-11-23One more word about "simpl f": avoid "simpl f" to be printed "simpl f",Hugo Herbelin
at least when f is an evaluable reference.
2014-11-18Hopefully the last word on having "simpl f" complying with theHugo Herbelin
semantics described in the reference manual (i.e. if "f" is a qualid, do not add implicit arguments and, a fortiori, do not try to solve these implicit arguments - in particular, changing DbLib which expected this rule not to be followed).
2014-11-16Enforcing a stronger difference between the two syntaxes "simplHugo Herbelin
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").
2014-11-09Removing a unused boolean in the TacMove node of tacexpr AST.Pierre-Marie Pédrot
2014-11-07Fixing #3562 ("as" in "destruct" expects either a disjunctiveHugo Herbelin
intropattern or a bound ltac variable).
2014-10-25This commit introduces changes in induction and destruct.Hugo Herbelin
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.
2014-10-07Splitting out of auto.ml a file hints.ml dedicated to hints so as toHugo Herbelin
being able to export hints without tactics, vm, etc. to come with. Some functions moved to the new proof engine.
2014-09-30Seeing IntroWildcard as an action intro pattern rather than as a naming patternHugo Herbelin
(the action is "clear"). Added subst_intropattern which was missing since the introduction of ApplyOn intro patterns. Still to do: make "intros _ ?id" working without interferences when "id" is precisely the internal name used for hypotheses to discard.
2014-09-24Using an or_var rather than the hack with loc for coding a pure identHugo Herbelin
as a disjunctive intropattern.
2014-09-08Removing the XML plugin.Pierre-Marie Pédrot
Left a README, just in case someone will discover the remnants of it decades from now.
2014-09-05Silence an ocaml warning.Arnaud Spiwack
2014-09-03Useless hooks in Tacintern.Pierre-Marie Pédrot
2014-09-03Code factorization in Tacintern.Pierre-Marie Pédrot
2014-09-02Removing [revert] tactic from the AST.Pierre-Marie Pédrot
2014-09-01Moving the decompose tactic out of the AST.Pierre-Marie Pédrot
2014-09-01Code cleaning in Tacintern.Pierre-Marie Pédrot
2014-08-31Getting rid of atomic tactics in Tacenv.Pierre-Marie Pédrot
ML tactics that may be used as simple identifiers are now declared as a true Ltac entry pertaining to the module that contains the Declare ML Module statement.
2014-08-29Type-safe version of genarg list / pair / opt functions.Pierre-Marie Pédrot
2014-08-18Adding a new intro-pattern for "apply in" on the fly. Using syntaxHugo Herbelin
"pat/term" for "apply term on current_hyp as pat".
2014-08-18Reorganisation of intropattern codeHugo Herbelin
- emphasizing the different kinds of patterns - factorizing code of the non-naming intro-patterns Still some questions: - Should -> and <- apply to hypotheses or not (currently they apply to hypotheses either when used in assert-style tactics or apply in, or when the term to rewrite is a variable, in which case "subst" is applied)? - Should "subst" be used when the -> or <- rewrites an equation x=t posed by "assert" (i.e. rewrite everywhere and clearing x and hyp)? - Should -> and <- be applicable in non assert-style if the lemma has quantifications?
2014-08-18Moving the TacAlias node out of atomic tactics.Pierre-Marie Pédrot
2014-08-18Moving the TacExtend node from atomic to plain tactics.Pierre-Marie Pédrot
Also taking advantage of the change to rename it into TacML. Ultimately should allow ML tactic to return values.
2014-08-07Removing simple induction / destruct from the AST.Pierre-Marie Pédrot
2014-08-07Instead of relying on a trick to make the constructor tactic parse, putPierre-Marie Pédrot
all the tactics using the constructor keyword in one entry. This has the side-effect to also remove the other variant of constructor from the AST. I also needed to hack around the "tauto" tactic to make it work, by calling directly the ML tactic through a TacExtend node. This may be generalized to get rid of the intermingled dependencies between this tactic and the infamous Ltac quotation mechanism.
2014-08-07Removing the "constructor" tactic from the AST.Pierre-Marie Pédrot
2014-08-06Revert the change in Constrintern introduced by "Add a type of untyped term ↵Arnaud Spiwack
to Ltac's value." It was commit 52247f50fa9aed83cc4a9a714b6b8f779479fd9b. The closure in uconstr renders these changes (pertaining to substitution of ltac variables during internalisation) obsolete.
2014-08-06Removing "intros untils" from the AST.Pierre-Marie Pédrot
2014-08-05Experimentally adding an option for automatically erasing anHugo Herbelin
hypothesis when using it in apply or rewrite (prefix ">", undocumented), and a modifier to explicitly keep it in induction or destruct (prefix "!", reminiscent of non-linerarity). Also added undocumented option "Set Default Clearing Used Hypotheses" which makes apply and rewrite default to erasing the hypothesis they use (if ever their argument is indeed an hypothesis of the context).
2014-08-05Adding a syntax "enough" for the variant of "assert" with the order ofHugo Herbelin
subgoals and the role of the "by tac" clause swapped.
2014-08-02Better struture for Ltac internalization environments in Constrintern.Pierre-Marie Pédrot
2014-08-01New tactical [> t1…tn] to apply tactics t1…tn to the corresponding goal.Arnaud Spiwack
Differs from the usual t;[t1…tn] in two ways: * It can be used without a preceding tactic * It counts every focused subgoal, rather than considering independently the goals generated by the application of the preceding tactic on individual goals. In other words t;[t1…tn] is [> t;[>t1…tn].. ].
2014-08-01Add [numgoal] to Ltac.Arnaud Spiwack
2014-07-29Untyped terms in tactic: function [type_term c] to give a typed version of [c].Arnaud Spiwack
2014-07-29Add a type of untyped term to Ltac's value.Arnaud Spiwack
It is meant to avoid intermediary retyping when a term is built in Ltac. See #3218. The implementation makes a small modification in Constrintern: now the main internalisation function can take an extra substitution from Ltac variables to glob_constr and will apply the substitution during the internalisation.
2014-07-25Removing dead code relative to or_metaid.Pierre-Marie Pédrot
2014-07-24Distinguish tactics t1;t2 and t1;[t2..].Arnaud Spiwack
They used to be the same (and had a single entry in the AST). But now that t2 can be a multi-goal tactic, t1;[t2..] has the semantics of executing t2 in each goal independently.
2014-07-13Adding a "time" tactical for benchmarking purposes. In case the tacticHugo Herbelin
backtracks, print time spent in each of successive calls.
2014-07-07Revert "time tac" (committed by mistake).Hugo Herbelin
This reverts commit abad0a15ac44cb5b53b87382bb4d587d9800a0f6.
2014-07-07time tacHugo Herbelin
2014-06-17Removing dead code.Pierre-Marie Pédrot
2014-06-06Moving the [split] tactic out of the AST.Pierre-Marie Pédrot