Skip to content
Snippets Groups Projects
Commit 609c15c2 authored by Robbert Krebbers's avatar Robbert Krebbers
Browse files

Tweak proof.

parent 986a8883
No related branches found
No related tags found
No related merge requests found
Hide whitespace changes
Inline Side-by-side
theories/base_logic/upred.v
+ 1
− 3
View file @ 609c15c2
...@@ -631,9 +631,7 @@ Proof. by unseal. Qed. ...@@ -631,9 +631,7 @@ Proof. by unseal. Qed.
Lemma prop_ext_2 P Q : ■ ((P -∗ Q) ∧ (Q -∗ P)) ⊢ P ≡ Q. Lemma prop_ext_2 P Q : ■ ((P -∗ Q) ∧ (Q -∗ P)) ⊢ P ≡ Q.
Proof. Proof.
unseal; split=> n x ? /= HPQ. split=> n' x' ??. unseal; split=> n x ? /=. setoid_rewrite (left_id ε op). split; naive_solver.
move: HPQ=> [] /(_ n' x'); rewrite !left_id=> ?.
move=> /(_ n' x'); rewrite !left_id=> ?. naive_solver.
Qed. Qed.
(* The following two laws are very similar, and indeed they hold not just for □ (* The following two laws are very similar, and indeed they hold not just for □
......
0% or .
You are about to add 0 people to the discussion. Proceed with caution.
Finish editing this message first!
Please register or to comment