rename rules -> op_rules
Really, *all* of our files contain proof rules
But op rules makes even less sense... Then call it wp_rules?
Now it looks like this file is specific to bin_op and un_op or so.
But op rules makes even less sense...
It certainly makes more sense than just "rules". I agree it may not be perfect.
Then call it wp_rules?
Containing rules for WP is hardly a distinguishing feature of this file. What about lang_wp or wp_lang?
I think rules covers it fairly well, this file contains the core proof rules of the language. All the other stuff is just derived on top of that.
But since you don't like it, how about just
weakestpreby analogy to
program_logic/weakestpre. Or alternatively,
It is in the root of the folder
heap_lang, that should make that clear.
First of all, @jung, I don't quite see how
op_rulesmakes more sense than
rules. I don't see what
oprefers to : operational? operators? Then, I don't like
So, now, I like
wp. We could even go back to
lifting, which, I think, was quite a good name.
JH precisely describes my concerns. We then also have to prefix all the other files with
I am not so sure whether
liftingstill makes sense,
program_logic/liftingcontains the generic lifting lemmas/rules, whereas this file just makes use of it.
I am not so sure whether lifting still makes sense, program_logic/lifting contains the generic lifting lemmas/rules, whereas this file just makes use of it.
That is the point : in a sense, this file specializes the lifting lemmas to this language.
opis for operational. But okay, if you both don't like it, then let's look for sth. else.
heap_langcontains lots of things related to the language, the primitive language-specific triples are fairly particular. I think that justifies having
langtwice, like it is twice in
op is for operational. But okay, if you both don't like it, then let's look for sth. else.
Ok. But the point is that here we are not describing the operational semantics, but rather an axiomatic semantic.
rules_opwould probably be more appropriate for the current
heap_lang contains lots of things related to the language, the primitive language-specific triples are fairly particular. I think that justifies having lang twice, like it is twice in heap_lang.lang.
I am not too strongly opposed to
wp_lang. Enven though
liftingwould make more sens in my opinion.
I will veto anything involving "rules" (I am aware this includes vetoing the current name; the reason I used it is that I wanted to stick to the term you used but make it more descriptive). I could maybe accept just "weakestpre", but I still think it is a horribly indescriptive name.
Alright, then let's go back to
liftingas the file was called before. JH seems to prefer that name, and it is the first common name on both of our lists.
Ack. Will do.