1. 07 Apr, 2019 1 commit
  2. 05 Mar, 2019 1 commit
  3. 05 Feb, 2019 1 commit
  4. 27 Nov, 2018 2 commits
  5. 31 Oct, 2018 1 commit
  6. 29 Oct, 2018 2 commits
    • Jacques-Henri Jourdan's avatar
      wp_pures. · 2950fca6
      Jacques-Henri Jourdan authored
      2950fca6
    • Jacques-Henri Jourdan's avatar
      A specific constructor for injecting values in expressions · 9646293e
      Jacques-Henri Jourdan authored
      We add a specific constructor to the type of expressions for injecting
      values in expressions.
      
      The advantage are :
      - Values can be assumed to be always closed when performing
        substitutions (even though they could contain free variables, but it
        turns out it does not cause any problem in the proofs in
        practice). This means that we no longer need the `Closed` typeclass
        and everything that comes with it (all the reflection-based machinery
        contained in tactics.v is no longer necessary). I have not measured
        anything, but I guess this would have a significant performance
        impact.
      
      - There is only one constructor for values. As a result, the AsVal and
        IntoVal typeclasses are no longer necessary: an expression which is
        a value will always unify with `Val _`, and therefore lemmas can be
        stated using this constructor.
      
      Of course, this means that there are two ways of writing such a thing
      as "The pair of integers 1 and 2": Either by using the value
      constructor applied to the pair represented as a value, or by using
      the expression pair constructor. So we add reduction rules that
      transform reduced pair, injection and closure expressions into values.
      At first, this seems weird, because of the redundancy. But in fact,
      this has some meaning, since the machine migth actually be doing
      something to e.g., allocate the pair or the closure.
      
      These additional steps of computation show up in the proofs, and some
      additional wp_* tactics need to be called.
      9646293e
  7. 04 Oct, 2018 1 commit
  8. 03 Oct, 2018 1 commit
  9. 04 Jul, 2018 2 commits
  10. 02 Jul, 2018 1 commit
  11. 30 Jun, 2018 1 commit
  12. 29 Jun, 2018 3 commits
  13. 14 Jun, 2018 2 commits
  14. 13 Jun, 2018 1 commit
  15. 06 Jun, 2018 2 commits
  16. 17 May, 2018 1 commit
  17. 27 Apr, 2018 1 commit
  18. 23 Apr, 2018 2 commits
  19. 13 Jan, 2018 1 commit
  20. 07 Dec, 2017 1 commit
  21. 05 Dec, 2017 1 commit
  22. 30 Nov, 2017 1 commit
  23. 09 Nov, 2017 3 commits
  24. 08 Nov, 2017 2 commits
  25. 25 Sep, 2017 3 commits
    • Robbert Krebbers's avatar
      Let stateful tactics try all decompositions. · 284ccdd5
      Robbert Krebbers authored
      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.
      284ccdd5
    • Dan Frumin's avatar
      Add a `repeat (wp_pure _)` example. · 8e4f1524
      Dan Frumin authored
      8e4f1524
    • Dan Frumin's avatar
      The `PureExec` typeclass for performing pure symbolic executions. · bbcd2c84
      Dan Frumin authored
      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
      bbcd2c84
  26. 05 Jan, 2017 1 commit
  27. 03 Jan, 2017 1 commit