| Age | Commit message (Collapse) | Author |
|---|
|
We introduce a warning so boolean attributes are expected to be of the
form `attr={yes,no}` or just `attr` (for `yes`).
We update the documentation, test-suite, and changelog.
|
|
Reviewed-by: mattam82
Reviewed-by: maximedenes
Reviewed-by: jfehrle
Ack-by: gares
Ack-by: Zimmi48
Ack-by: ppedrot
|
|
|
|
This allows the following to interpret "0" in the expected scope:
Notation "0" := true : bool_scope.
Axiom f : bool -> bool -> nat.
Record R := { p : bool -> nat }.
Check (@f 0) 0.
Check fun r => r.(@p) 0.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reviewed-by: ppedrot
|
|
Reviewed-by: herbelin
Reviewed-by: JasonGross
Reviewed-by: jfehrle
Ack-by: Zimmi48
|
|
Reviewed-by: gares
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ltac variables were not yet supported.
|
|
record types not taken into account
Reviewed-by: SkySkimmer
|
|
|
|
Fixes implicit arguments from the body of a defined field not taken into account.
Get (a bit) more information for detection of SProp relevance in
implicitly-typed defined field. (It should be done at the very end of
the inference phase, though, because some evars may not yet be
instantiated.)
|
|
Fixes probably many strange issues such as the example in #13171
|
|
Fix part of #8196, fix #12414
Replaces #9343
|
|
Reviewed-by: ppedrot
|
|
The doc states it is deprecated since 1386cd9 but this was ages before the
deprecation mechanism existed.
|
|
Keep Numeral Notation wit a deprecation warning.
|
|
The names computed in consume_pattern were lost when calling
intros_pattern_core. Moreover, the computation of names to avoid was
done several time. We compute it once for all.
|
|
Should be more robust with async proofs
|
|
Fix #12928
Fix #3146
|
|
Try just going with the user-given names, and not worrying about
what happens with repeated names or anonymous implicits.
(Support for anonymous implicits is due to herbelin in #11098.)
This PR should not change behaviour in the absence of repeated names.
Since repeated names are already a poorly handled corner case, I would
recommend changing binder names to avoid overlap in the case of a
change in behavior.
Since anonymous implicits and implicits with repeated names can already
happen, I think this is unlikely to cause too many new problems,
though it might exacerbate existing ones. However, I already had to fix
one newly possible anomaly, so I can't be too confident.
The most common change in external developments was that an argument
no longer gets `0` appended to it, causing the `Arguments` command
to complain about renaming.
To fix this and keep the old name, one can simply use the `rename` flag
as suggested, or switch to the new, un-suffixed name.
Closes #6785
Closes #12001
Another step towards checking the standard library with `-mangle-names`.
|
|
|
|
Reviewed-by: SkySkimmer
Ack-by: silene
|
|
qualid in tactic notations
Reviewed-by: Zimmi48
Ack-by: jfehrle
|
|
No need to store the case_info, all the data is reconstructible from the
context. Furthermore, this reconstruction is performed in a context where
we already access the environment, so performance is not at stake.
Hopefully this will also reduce the number of globally allocated VM values,
since the switch representation now only depends on the shape of the inductive
type.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reviewed-by: ppedrot
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Apparently the `Timeout` exception is raised by a signal handled, and
that can happen when the running thread is a worker manager, rather than
the main thread (the one that should be interrupted).
Given that the point of these tests is to test *auto and not the STM,
we disable async proofs forcibly.
|
|
Part of this PR was automatically generated by running dev/doc/update-compat.py --master
|
|
Error happened only when writing:
functional induction f x y z.
instead of
functional induction (f x y z).
Now the former is equivalent to the former: implicits must be omitted.
Hence small source of incompatibility, but a more homogeneous
behaviour.
|
|
Reviewed-by: Zimmi48
Reviewed-by: anton-trunov
Reviewed-by: ejgallego
|
|
See #11840 for a motivation. I had to fix Floats.FloatLemmas because
it uses the same name for a notation and a term, and the fact this
unfold was working on this was clearly a bug. I hope nobody relies
on this kind of stuff in the wild.
Fixes #5764: "Cannot coerce ..." should be a runtime error.
Fixes #5159: "Cannot coerce ..." should not be an error.
Fixes #4925: unfold gives error on Admitted.
|
|
Reviewed-by: SkySkimmer
Ack-by: Zimmi48
|
|
Reviewed-by: herbelin
|
|
This reverts commit 3c66c60e52b334482bcfe3d1d97bb77e4d011d18.
We instead add a warning in the manual and a kludge in the test-suite.
|
|
Copy tclWRAPFINALLY to tactics.ml
As per https://github.com/coq/coq/pull/12197#discussion_r418480525 and
https://gitter.im/coq/coq?at=5ead5c35347bd616304e83ef, we don't export
it from Proofview, because it seems somehow not primitive enough. But
we don't export it from Tactics because it is more of a tactical than a
tactic. But we don't export it from Tacticals because all of the
non-New tacticals there operate on `tactic`, not `Proofview.tactic`, and
all of the `New` tacticals that deal with multi-success things are
focussing, i.e., apply their arguments on each goal separately (and it
even says so in the comment on `New`), whereas it's important that
`tclWRAPFINALLY` doesn't introduce extra focussing.
|
|
As per https://github.com/coq/coq/pull/12129#issuecomment-619389803
Note that we need to work around #12179 in doc of with_strategy
|
|
|
|
Useful for guarding calls to `unfold` or `cbv` to ensure that, e.g.,
`Opaque foo` doesn't break some automation which tries to unfold `foo`.
We have some timeouts in the strategy success file. We should not run
into issues, because we are not really testing how long these take. We
could just as well use `Timeout 60` or longer, we just want to make sure
the file dies more quickly rather than taking over 10^100 steps.
Note that this tactic does not play well with `abstract`; I have a
potentially controversial change that fixes this issue.
One of the lines in the doc comes from
https://github.com/coq/coq/pull/12129#issuecomment-619771556
Co-Authored-By: Pierre-Marie Pédrot <pierre-marie.pedrot@irif.fr>
Co-Authored-By: Théo Zimmermann <theo.zimmermann@inria.fr>
Co-Authored-By: Michael Soegtrop <7895506+MSoegtropIMC@users.noreply.github.com>
|
|
Part of the plan of #11840.
|
|
Fixes #12196
|
|
|
