GitLab

We now use the `Maybe` prefix as also used for `Frame`: it indicates
whether progress has been made by stripping of a later or not.

This is to make sure that e.g. `//` in `iEval (rewrite .. // ..)` does
not immediately close the goal by reflexivity.

This reverts commit 913059d2.

This reverts commit 849abb8d, reversing changes
made to 8de0b894.  The merge was done
accidentally, before review happened.

This solves issue #100: the proof mode notation is sometimes not printed. As
Ralf discovered, the problem is that there are two overlapping notations:

```coq
Notation "P ⊢ Q" := (uPred_entails P Q).
```

And the "proof mode" notation:

```
Notation "Γ '--------------------------------------' □ Δ '--------------------------------------' ∗ Q" :=
  (of_envs (Envs Γ Δ) ⊢ Q%I).
```

These two notations overlap, so, when having a "proof mode" goal of the shape
`of_envs (Envs Γ Δ) ⊢ Q%I`, how do we know which notation is Coq going to pick
for pretty printing this goal? As we have seen, this choice depends on the
import order (since both notations appear in different files), and as such, Coq
sometimes (unintendedly) uses the first notation instead of the latter.

The idea of this commit is to wrap `of_envs (Envs Γ Δ) ⊢ Q%I` into a definition
so that there is no ambiguity for the pretty printer anymore.

This class, in combination with `TCForall`, turns out the useful in
LambdaRust to express that lists of expressions are values.

This problem has been reported by Léon Gondelman.

Before, when using, for example wp_alloc, in an expression like:

  ref (ref v)

It would apply `tac_wp_alloc` to the outermost ref, after which it
fails to establish that the argument `ref v` is a value. In this
commit, other evaluation positions will be tried whenever it turn
out that the argument of the construct is not a value. The same
applies to store/cas/...

I have implemented this by making use of the new `IntoVal` class.

This way `IntoLaterNEnvs` is ought to be computed less frequently

The tactic was doing something weird and only once used.

- Get rid of wp_finish, which was a hack.
- Write the wp_ tactics for stateful steps in the same style as
  wp_pure, i.e. by taking the context into account.
- Make use of the context K in wp_pure.

Instead of writing a separate tactic lemma for each pure reduction,
there is a single tactic lemma for performing all of them.

The instances of PureExec can be shared between WP tactics and, e.g.
symbolic execution in the ghost  threadpool

We now first iPoseProof the lemma and instantiate its premises before trying
to search for the sub-term where to apply. As a result, instantiation of the
premises of the applied lemmas happens only once, instead of it being done for
each sub-term as obtained by reshape_expr.

wp_apply often results in an of_val that should be simplified.