Skip to content
GitLab
Explore
Sign in
Primary navigation
Search or go to…
Project
I
Iris
Manage
Activity
Members
Labels
Plan
Issues
Issue boards
Milestones
Wiki
Code
Merge requests
Repository
Branches
Commits
Tags
Repository graph
Compare revisions
Snippets
Build
Pipelines
Jobs
Pipeline schedules
Artifacts
Deploy
Releases
Model registry
Operate
Environments
Monitor
Incidents
Service Desk
Analyze
Value stream analytics
Contributor analytics
CI/CD analytics
Repository analytics
Model experiments
Help
Help
Support
GitLab documentation
Compare GitLab plans
Community forum
Contribute to GitLab
Provide feedback
Terms and privacy
Keyboard shortcuts
?
Snippets
Groups
Projects
Show more breadcrumbs
Abel Nieto
Iris
Commits
b90c8908
Commit
b90c8908
authored
6 years ago
by
Robbert Krebbers
Browse files
Options
Downloads
Patches
Plain Diff
Improve docs of `iPoseProofCore`.
parent
4e597ea3
No related branches found
No related tags found
No related merge requests found
Changes
1
Hide whitespace changes
Inline
Side-by-side
Showing
1 changed file
theories/proofmode/ltac_tactics.v
+23
-8
23 additions, 8 deletions
theories/proofmode/ltac_tactics.v
with
23 additions
and
8 deletions
theories/proofmode/ltac_tactics.v
+
23
−
8
View file @
b90c8908
...
...
@@ -760,14 +760,6 @@ Local Ltac iIntoEmpValid t :=
[
iSolveTC
||
fail
1
"iPoseProof: not a BI assertion"
|
exact
t
]]
.
(* The tactic [tac] is called with a temporary fresh name [H]. The argument
[lazy_tc] denotes whether type class inference on the premises of [lem] should
be performed before (if false) or after (if true) [tac H] is called.
The tactic [iApply] uses lazy type class inference, so that evars can first be
instantiated by matching with the goal, whereas [iDestruct] does not, because
eliminations may not be performed when type classes have not been resolved.
*)
Local
Ltac
iPoseProofCore_go
Htmp
t
goal_tac
:=
lazymatch
type
of
t
with
|
ident
=>
...
...
@@ -788,6 +780,29 @@ Local Ltac iPoseProofCore_go Htmp t goal_tac :=
|
goal_tac
()]
end
;
try
iSolveTC
.
(** The tactic [iPoseProofCore lem as p lazy_tc tac] inserts the resource
described by [lem] into the context. The tactic takes a continuation [tac] as
its argument, which is called with a temporary fresh name [H] that refers to
the hypothesis containing [lem].
There are a couple of additional arguments:
- The argument [p] is like that of [iSpecialize]. It is a Boolean that denotes
whether the conclusion of the specialized term [lem] is persistent.
- The argument [lazy_tc] denotes whether type class inference on the premises
of [lem] should be performed before (if [lazy_tc = false]) or after, i.e.
lazily (if [lazy_tc = true]) [tac H] is called.
Both variants of [lazy_tc] are used in other tactics that build on top of
[iPoseProofCore]:
- The tactic [iApply] uses lazy type class inference (i.e. [lazy_tc = true]),
so that evars can first be matched against the goal before being solved by
type class inference.
- The tactic [iDestruct] uses eager type class inference (i.e. [lazy_tc = false])
because it may be not possible to eliminate logical connectives before all
type class constraints have been resolved. *)
Tactic
Notation
"iPoseProofCore"
open_constr
(
lem
)
"as"
constr
(
p
)
constr
(
lazy_tc
)
tactic
(
tac
)
:=
iStartProof
;
...
...
This diff is collapsed.
Click to expand it.
Preview
0%
Loading
Try again
or
attach a new file
.
Cancel
You are about to add
0
people
to the discussion. Proceed with caution.
Finish editing this message first!
Save comment
Cancel
Please
register
or
sign in
to comment