From c2abcaefd796b7f430f056884349b9d959525eec Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Emilio Jesus Gallego Arias
Date: Sat, 22 Jun 2019 01:53:08 +0200
Subject: [proof] Remove last case of optional `?poly` arguments.

As noted in GitHub discussion, it is a good idea to make `poly` always
explicit, this PR does remove last case of `?(poly=false)` in the
codebase.
---
 proofs/pfedit.ml  |  2 +-
 proofs/pfedit.mli | 11 ++++++++---
 2 files changed, 9 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)

(limited to 'proofs')

diff --git a/proofs/pfedit.ml b/proofs/pfedit.ml
index 7af14d099c..ed60b8274a 100644
--- a/proofs/pfedit.ml
+++ b/proofs/pfedit.ml
@@ -132,7 +132,7 @@ let build_constant_by_tactic ~name ctx sign ~poly typ tac =
     let reraise = CErrors.push reraise in
     iraise reraise
 
-let build_by_tactic ?(side_eff=true) env sigma ?(poly=false) typ tac =
+let build_by_tactic ?(side_eff=true) env sigma ~poly typ tac =
   let name = Id.of_string ("temporary_proof"^string_of_int (next())) in
   let sign = val_of_named_context (named_context env) in
   let ce, status, univs = build_constant_by_tactic ~name sigma sign ~poly typ tac in
diff --git a/proofs/pfedit.mli b/proofs/pfedit.mli
index 5f8a073bd1..0626e40047 100644
--- a/proofs/pfedit.mli
+++ b/proofs/pfedit.mli
@@ -66,9 +66,14 @@ val build_constant_by_tactic
   -> unit Proofview.tactic
   -> Evd.side_effects Proof_global.proof_entry * bool * UState.t
 
-val build_by_tactic : ?side_eff:bool -> env -> UState.t -> ?poly:bool ->
-  EConstr.types -> unit Proofview.tactic ->
-  constr * bool * UState.t
+val build_by_tactic
+  :  ?side_eff:bool
+  -> env
+  -> UState.t
+  -> poly:bool
+  -> EConstr.types
+  -> unit Proofview.tactic
+  -> constr * bool * UState.t
 
 val refine_by_tactic
   :  name:Id.t
-- 
cgit v1.2.3