Skip to content
Projects
Groups
Snippets
Help
Loading...
Help
Support
Keyboard shortcuts
?
Submit feedback
Contribute to GitLab
Sign in / Register
Toggle navigation
I
Iris
Project overview
Project overview
Details
Activity
Releases
Repository
Repository
Files
Commits
Branches
Tags
Contributors
Graph
Compare
Issues
83
Issues
83
List
Boards
Labels
Milestones
Merge Requests
8
Merge Requests
8
CI / CD
CI / CD
Pipelines
Jobs
Schedules
Analytics
Analytics
CI / CD
Repository
Value Stream
Wiki
Wiki
Members
Members
Collapse sidebar
Close sidebar
Activity
Graph
Create a new issue
Jobs
Commits
Issue Boards
Open sidebar
Iris
Iris
Commits
bb8f7667
Commit
bb8f7667
authored
Mar 04, 2016
by
Ralf Jung
Committed by
Robbert Krebbers
Mar 04, 2016
Browse files
Options
Browse Files
Download
Email Patches
Plain Diff
some more comments
parent
162c2f80
Pipeline
#247
passed with stage
Changes
1
Pipelines
1
Hide whitespace changes
Inline
Sidebyside
Showing
1 changed file
with
15 additions
and
0 deletions
+15
0
heap_lang/lang.v
heap_lang/lang.v
+15
0
No files found.
heap_lang/lang.v
View file @
bb8f7667
...
...
@@ 32,8 +32,16 @@ Proof.
destruct
mx
;
rewrite
/=
?elem_of_cons
;
naive_solver
.
Qed
.
(** A typeclass for whether a variable is bound in a given
context. Making this a typeclass means we can use tpeclass search
to program solving these constraints, so this becomes extensible.
Also, since typeclass search runs *after* unification, Coq has already
inferred the X for us; if we were to go for embedded proof terms ot
tactics, Coq would do things in the wrong order. *)
Class
VarBound
(
x
:
string
)
(
X
:
list
string
)
:
=
var_bound
:
bool_decide
(
x
∈
X
).
(* FIXME shouldn't this have this Hint to only perfom search of x and X
are not evars? *)
Hint
Extern
0
(
VarBound
_
_
)
=>
vm_compute
;
exact
I
:
typeclass_instances
.
Instance
var_bound_proof_irrel
x
X
:
ProofIrrel
(
VarBound
x
X
).
...
...
@@ 46,6 +54,13 @@ Qed.
Inductive
expr
(
X
:
list
string
)
:
=
(* Base lambda calculus *)
(* Var is the only place where the terms contain a proof. The fact that they
contain a proof at all is suboptimal, since this means two seeminlgy
convertible terms could differ in their proofs. However, this also has
some advantages:
* We can make the [X] an index, so we can do nondependent match.
* In expr_weaken, we can push the proof all the way into Var, making
sure that proofs never block computation. *)

Var
(
x
:
string
)
`
{
VarBound
x
X
}

Rec
(
f
x
:
binder
)
(
e
:
expr
(
f
:
b
:
x
:
b
:
X
))

App
(
e1
e2
:
expr
X
)
...
...
Write
Preview
Markdown
is supported
0%
Try again
or
attach a new file
Attach a file
Cancel
You are about to add
0
people
to the discussion. Proceed with caution.
Finish editing this message first!
Cancel
Please
register
or
sign in
to comment