1. 20 Apr, 2018 1 commit
  2. 21 Mar, 2018 1 commit
  3. 12 Mar, 2018 1 commit
  4. 08 Mar, 2018 2 commits
  5. 07 Mar, 2018 3 commits
  6. 06 Mar, 2018 2 commits
  7. 05 Mar, 2018 1 commit
    • Robbert Krebbers's avatar
      Start improving control over type class search in proof mode tactics. · a74b8077
      Robbert Krebbers authored
      We do this in two ways:
      
      - Use `notypeclasses refine` instead of `eapply`, to avoid type class
        search being called arbitrary.
      - Use `typeclasses eauto` instead of `apply _`, to avoid type class
        search being called on unrelated evars.
      
      I mainly tried this for `iSpecialize` and friends; this same remains to
      be done for all other tactics.
      
      This commit also makes partial progress w.r.t. issue #135.
      a74b8077
  8. 04 Mar, 2018 2 commits
  9. 03 Mar, 2018 3 commits
  10. 01 Mar, 2018 1 commit
    • Jacques-Henri Jourdan's avatar
      Make iFrame able to accumulate assertions in an evar. · 09663be3
      Jacques-Henri Jourdan authored
      This requires changing the Hint Mode of the [Frame] type class because it should not fail if its parameter is an evar, but instantiate it instead. In order to prevent all the other instances of [Frame] to intantiate this evar themselves, we create a new type class [KnwonFrame], which corresponds to the old behavior.
      09663be3
  11. 27 Feb, 2018 2 commits
  12. 22 Feb, 2018 1 commit
  13. 20 Feb, 2018 4 commits
  14. 12 Feb, 2018 3 commits
  15. 07 Feb, 2018 3 commits
  16. 02 Feb, 2018 1 commit
  17. 23 Jan, 2018 1 commit
  18. 20 Jan, 2018 1 commit
  19. 20 Dec, 2017 1 commit
  20. 13 Nov, 2017 1 commit
  21. 01 Nov, 2017 3 commits
    • Robbert Krebbers's avatar
      Hide the proof mode entailment behind a definition. · 8574d1ea
      Robbert Krebbers authored
      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.
      8574d1ea
    • Jacques-Henri Jourdan's avatar
      58b8eafa
    • Jacques-Henri Jourdan's avatar
      Remove notations for bi_bare and bi_persistently. · a38db108
      Jacques-Henri Jourdan authored
      (□ P) now means (bi_bare (bi_persistently P)).
      
      This is motivated by the fact that these two modalities are rarely
      used separately.
      
      In the case of an affine BI, we keep the □ notation. This means that a
      bi_bare is inserted each time we use □. Hence, a few adaptations need
      to be done in the proof mode class instances.
      a38db108
  22. 30 Oct, 2017 2 commits