Skip to content
GitLab
Explore
Sign in
Primary navigation
Search or go to…
Project
A
Actris
Manage
Activity
Members
Labels
Plan
Issues
Issue boards
Milestones
Code
Merge requests
Repository
Branches
Commits
Tags
Repository graph
Compare revisions
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
Iris
Actris
Commits
c86266a4
Commit
c86266a4
authored
4 years ago
by
Jonas Kastberg
Browse files
Options
Downloads
Patches
Plain Diff
Improved text on difference from paper
parent
b2aa14bb
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
papers/LMCS.md
+6
-5
6 additions, 5 deletions
papers/LMCS.md
with
6 additions
and
5 deletions
papers/LMCS.md
+
6
−
5
View file @
c86266a4
...
...
@@ -27,8 +27,9 @@ in [papers/POPL20.md](POPL20.md), that are briefly discussed here.
The paper presents a set of rules for the subprotocol relation with binders,
namely
`⊑-send-mono'`
,
`⊑-recv-mono'`
, and
`⊑-swap'`
. These are not available
in the mechanisation, for technical reasons related to the encoding of binders.
However, the rules are admissible from the primitive rules, as explained in the
paper. The consequence of this is observed in the proof of the Löb recursion
example, which differs from the proof presented in the paper, as it uses the
rules with binders.
in the mechanisation, as applying them can be cumbersome, due to the encoding of
the binders. However, the rules are admissible from the primitive rules, as
explained in the paper. Additionally, working with the tactics, as elaborated on
in the mechanisation section of the paper, is recommended. This can be observed in
the proof of the Löb recursion example, which differs from the proof presented in
the paper.
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