Iris issueshttps://gitlab.mpi-sws.org/iris/iris/-/issues2021-06-17T07:20:40Zhttps://gitlab.mpi-sws.org/iris/iris/-/issues/419Iron slowdown investigation2021-06-17T07:20:40ZRalf Jungjung@mpi-sws.orgIron slowdown investigationIron has [slowed down by 1.8%](https://coq-speed.mpi-sws.org/d/Ne7jkX6kk/coq-speed?orgId=1&var-metric=instructions&var-project=iron&var-branch=master&var-config=All&var-group=().*&from=1621369920715&to=1622831955880) just by updating Iri...Iron has [slowed down by 1.8%](https://coq-speed.mpi-sws.org/d/Ne7jkX6kk/coq-speed?orgId=1&var-metric=instructions&var-project=iron&var-branch=master&var-config=All&var-group=().*&from=1621369920715&to=1622831955880) just by updating Iris from `dev.2021-03-06.3.b0708b01` to `dev.2021-06-03.0.2959900d`. I am not sure if we can do anything about that, but it would be good to at least figure out which changes caused the slowdown (though it looks like there at several, so this might be "death by a thousand cuts").https://gitlab.mpi-sws.org/iris/iris/-/issues/168iSpecialize on implications behaves inconsistently2019-11-01T13:35:17ZRalf Jungjung@mpi-sws.orgiSpecialize on implications behaves inconsistentlyIn a goal like
```
"HP" : ■ P
--------------------------------------□
"HPQ" : ■ P → Q
--------------------------------------∗
Q
```
doing `iSpecialize ("HPQ" with "HP")` behaves as expected, but `iSpecialize ("HPQ" with "[]")` ...In a goal like
```
"HP" : ■ P
--------------------------------------□
"HPQ" : ■ P → Q
--------------------------------------∗
Q
```
doing `iSpecialize ("HPQ" with "HP")` behaves as expected, but `iSpecialize ("HPQ" with "[]")` fails saying
```
iSpecialize: (■ P → Q)%I not an implication/wand.
```
Here's a testcase:
```coq
Lemma test_plain_impl `{BiPlainly PROP} P Q :
(■ P → (■ P → Q) -∗ Q)%I.
Proof.
iIntros "#HP HPQ".
Fail iSpecialize ("HPQ" with "[]").
Fail iApply "HPQ".
iSpecialize ("HPQ" with "HP"). done.
Qed.
```https://gitlab.mpi-sws.org/iris/iris/-/issues/68iSpecialize should work even if the wand is under a later.2017-05-19T15:20:29ZJacques-Henri JourdaniSpecialize should work even if the wand is under a later.In the proofmode, if I have, say, the hypothesis `"H1" : ▷ (A -* B)`, then `iSpecialize ("H1" with "[]")` does not work. Is there any good reason for this ?In the proofmode, if I have, say, the hypothesis `"H1" : ▷ (A -* B)`, then `iSpecialize ("H1" with "[]")` does not work. Is there any good reason for this ?Robbert KrebbersRobbert Krebbershttps://gitlab.mpi-sws.org/iris/iris/-/issues/325iSpecialize with "[% //]" does not report an error if done fails2020-06-26T10:51:38ZTej Chajedtchajed@mit.eduiSpecialize with "[% //]" does not report an error if done failsiSpecialize on `SPureGoal true` does not report an error message.
```coq
From iris Require Import proofmode.tactics.
Theorem test {PROP: bi} (P: PROP) :
(⌜False⌝ -∗ P) -∗
P.
Proof.
iIntros "Hwand".
iSpecializePat_go "Hwand" [sp...iSpecialize on `SPureGoal true` does not report an error message.
```coq
From iris Require Import proofmode.tactics.
Theorem test {PROP: bi} (P: PROP) :
(⌜False⌝ -∗ P) -∗
P.
Proof.
iIntros "Hwand".
iSpecializePat_go "Hwand" [spec_patterns.SPureGoal true] (* with "[% //]" *).
Abort.
```
The reason is that this match is failing: https://gitlab.mpi-sws.org/iris/iris/-/blob/11f9d567c2a8b1f52d00e562d5cc39262463cf9e/theories/proofmode/ltac_tactics.v#L849. It should have another case that prints the normal Coq goal rather than the IPM goal.https://gitlab.mpi-sws.org/iris/iris/-/issues/25iSplitL "persistent_hyp": Improve error2016-08-06T00:12:25ZRalf Jungjung@mpi-sws.orgiSplitL "persistent_hyp": Improve errorCurrently, if I say `iSplitL "H"` where `H` is persistent, it says that `H` has not been found. That's confusing, "H" exists -- but it looked in the spatial context only. The tactic should either accept persistent hypotheses or the error...Currently, if I say `iSplitL "H"` where `H` is persistent, it says that `H` has not been found. That's confusing, "H" exists -- but it looked in the spatial context only. The tactic should either accept persistent hypotheses or the error should say "... has not been found in the spatial context" or so.Robbert KrebbersRobbert Krebbershttps://gitlab.mpi-sws.org/iris/iris/-/issues/199iSplitL no longer checks if assumptions are spatial2018-06-10T20:13:10ZRalf Jungjung@mpi-sws.orgiSplitL no longer checks if assumptions are spatialThe following used to fail with an error saying that `"HP"` is not a spatial assumption, now it just succeeds but still puts `"HP"` on both sides:
```
Lemma iSplit_intuitionistic P :
□ P -∗ P ∗ P.
Proof. iIntros "#HP". iSplitL "HP".
```The following used to fail with an error saying that `"HP"` is not a spatial assumption, now it just succeeds but still puts `"HP"` on both sides:
```
Lemma iSplit_intuitionistic P :
□ P -∗ P ∗ P.
Proof. iIntros "#HP". iSplitL "HP".
```https://gitlab.mpi-sws.org/iris/iris/-/issues/424Laterable cleanup2021-07-15T07:49:33ZRalf Jungjung@mpi-sws.orgLaterable cleanuphttps://gitlab.mpi-sws.org/iris/iris/-/merge_requests/636 made `make_laterable` more like a normal Iris citizen, but some cleanup remains until this is a regular modality:
* [ ] Define `Laterable` in terms of `make_laterable` (see `late...https://gitlab.mpi-sws.org/iris/iris/-/merge_requests/636 made `make_laterable` more like a normal Iris citizen, but some cleanup remains until this is a regular modality:
* [ ] Define `Laterable` in terms of `make_laterable` (see `laterable_alt`).
* [ ] Rename `make_laterable` to follow our modality naming scheme... `laterably`?
* [ ] Resolve TC backtracking issue around `persistent_laterable`
* [ ] `iMod` for `make_laterable` elimination?https://gitlab.mpi-sws.org/iris/iris/-/issues/146Lemmas about updates should be instantiated by default witht the current BI i...2018-07-13T08:51:27ZJacques-Henri JourdanLemmas about updates should be instantiated by default witht the current BI instead of `iProp`The instances for the `FUpd` and `FUpdFacts` type classes are set in a way that gives the priority to `iProp`? Therefore, when using lemmas about updates in `vProp`, we sometimes have to manually instantiate them with the current BI. Oth...The instances for the `FUpd` and `FUpdFacts` type classes are set in a way that gives the priority to `iProp`? Therefore, when using lemmas about updates in `vProp`, we sometimes have to manually instantiate them with the current BI. Otherwise, the lemmas are instantiated with `iProp` and used through the embedding.
See, for example https://gitlab.mpi-sws.org/FP/sra-gps/blob/gen_proofmode_WIP/theories/examples/circ_buffer.v#L236
The instances for the `AsValid` type class prioritizes the fact of not using the embedding, so we should be able to fix this issue by simply making sure the search for `AsValid` occurs before `FUpd`, but I do not know how to do that.
@robbertkrebbers, any idea?Robbert KrebbersRobbert Krebbershttps://gitlab.mpi-sws.org/iris/iris/-/issues/81Let iAlways clear the spatial context2017-10-27T12:33:40ZRalf Jungjung@mpi-sws.orgLet iAlways clear the spatial contextRight now, `iAlways` complains about the spatial context being non-empty. Same for `iIntros "!#"`. IMHO it would be nice to have a way to say "please make the context empty if it isn't". I suggest for `iAlways` to do that.
This is simil...Right now, `iAlways` complains about the spatial context being non-empty. Same for `iIntros "!#"`. IMHO it would be nice to have a way to say "please make the context empty if it isn't". I suggest for `iAlways` to do that.
This is similar to the difference between `iIntros "!>"` and `iNext` -- the latter may affect the context, the former will not. Furthermore, this is backwards compatible because iAlways will now only succeed in strictly more cases.Iris 3.1https://gitlab.mpi-sws.org/iris/iris/-/issues/418library inG instances should be local2021-06-02T14:46:21ZRalf Jungjung@mpi-sws.orglibrary inG instances should be localCurrently, the `libG → inG` instances in library are usually `Global`. This is bad, we should treat them as library implementation details and make them `Local`.Currently, the `libG → inG` instances in library are usually `Global`. This is bad, we should treat them as library implementation details and make them `Local`.https://gitlab.mpi-sws.org/iris/iris/-/issues/321Make `contractive_proper` into a lemma, or control other instances that make ...2020-10-20T09:21:24ZPaolo G. GiarrussoMake `contractive_proper` into a lemma, or control other instances that make it costly.Successful typeclass searches for `contractive_proper` take 0.1s — as shown by replacing `contractive_proper _` with `_`. So it should maybe be disabled like `ne_proper` (see 6df6c641aadd50cd9808035f77e41048a99e6600).
Logs like https://...Successful typeclass searches for `contractive_proper` take 0.1s — as shown by replacing `contractive_proper _` with `_`. So it should maybe be disabled like `ne_proper` (see 6df6c641aadd50cd9808035f77e41048a99e6600).
Logs like https://gist.github.com/Blaisorblade/541416169b97729e60bb80fb0f259b7d reveal that the problem is that `proper_reflexive` is tried first, and then search diverges. Finding a way to blacklist certain instances for `Reflexive (equiv ==> equiv)%signature` would be useful — maybe removing them and replacing them with `Hint Extern`?https://gitlab.mpi-sws.org/iris/iris/-/issues/69Make `done` solve the goal when one of the Iris hypothesis is `False`2017-05-19T15:20:29ZJacques-Henri JourdanMake `done` solve the goal when one of the Iris hypothesis is `False`As in Coq, this should work even if the hypothesis is not syntacticaly `False`, but only convertible to it.As in Coq, this should work even if the hypothesis is not syntacticaly `False`, but only convertible to it.https://gitlab.mpi-sws.org/iris/iris/-/issues/125Make `iClear` work when there is at least one absorbing spatial hypothesis2019-11-01T13:08:25ZRobbert KrebbersMake `iClear` work when there is at least one absorbing spatial hypothesis`iClear "H"` with `H : P` currently works if either the goal is absorbing, or `P` is affine. (The same applies to `iIntros "_"`).
We could add another case: there exists at least one spatial hypothesis that is absorbing.
See also the d...`iClear "H"` with `H : P` currently works if either the goal is absorbing, or `P` is affine. (The same applies to `iIntros "_"`).
We could add another case: there exists at least one spatial hypothesis that is absorbing.
See also the discussion in !98 for a possible use-case.Robbert KrebbersRobbert Krebbershttps://gitlab.mpi-sws.org/iris/iris/-/issues/428Make `iDestruct` work on `▷ ∃` if goal is except_0/update2021-07-22T13:02:40ZRobbert KrebbersMake `iDestruct` work on `▷ ∃` if goal is except_0/updateBIs have the interesting rule `bi.later_exist_except_0` which allows to commute `▷` and `∃ x : A` even if the domain `A` of the existential is not inhabited:
```coq
bi.later_exist_except_0 : ▷ (∃ a : A, Φ a) -∗ ◇ (∃ a : A, ▷ Φ a)
```
I...BIs have the interesting rule `bi.later_exist_except_0` which allows to commute `▷` and `∃ x : A` even if the domain `A` of the existential is not inhabited:
```coq
bi.later_exist_except_0 : ▷ (∃ a : A, Φ a) -∗ ◇ (∃ a : A, ▷ Φ a)
```
Instead, you get an except-0 (`◇`) modality, which can be eliminated if the goal is, for example, an update modality.
This trick is not commonly known, so it would be great if the proof mode's `iDestruct` tactic could use `bi.later_exist_except_0` automatically instead of just failing when the domain `A` is not inhabited.
This is what happens now:
```coq
From iris.proofmode Require Import tactics.
From iris.bi Require Import updates.
Lemma test `{BiFUpd PROP} {A} (Φ : A → PROP) (Q : PROP) E :
▷ (∃ x, Φ x) ={E}=∗ Q.
Proof.
iIntros "H".
(* Goal:
"H" : ▷ (∃ x : A, Φ x)
--------------------------------------∗
|={E}=> Q *)
(* Tactic failure: iExistDestruct: cannot destruct (▷ (∃ x : A, Φ x))%I. *)
Fail iDestruct "H" as (x) "H".
(* Works *)
iMod (bi.later_exist_except_0 with "H") as (x) "H".
```
I tried to implement what I proposed in this MR some day, but I could not find a satisfactory generalization of the `IntoExist` class. After all, that class then needs to take the goal into account to eliminate the ◇ modality.
An alternative, we could use the `pm_error` infrastructure from #413 (which still needs to be ported to `IntoExists`) to give an error that points the user to `bi.later_exist_except_0` in case the domain `A` is not inhabited.https://gitlab.mpi-sws.org/iris/iris/-/issues/148Make `iNext` smarter for mixed `▷` and `▷^(n+m)`2018-02-20T15:29:40ZLéon GondelmanMake `iNext` smarter for mixed `▷` and `▷^(n+m)`Following the (fixed) issue (https://gitlab.mpi-sws.org/FP/iris-coq/issues/141), there is still an error w.r.t. addition in the laterN modality:
```coq
From iris Require Import proofmode.tactics.
Lemma foo {M} (P : uPred M) n m : ▷ ▷^...Following the (fixed) issue (https://gitlab.mpi-sws.org/FP/iris-coq/issues/141), there is still an error w.r.t. addition in the laterN modality:
```coq
From iris Require Import proofmode.tactics.
Lemma foo {M} (P : uPred M) n m : ▷ ▷^(n+m) P ⊢ ▷^n ▷ P.
Proof. iIntros "H". iNext.
```
```coq
(* Gives
"H" : ▷ ▷^(n + m) P
--------------------------------------∗
▷ P
*)
```
forgetting erroneously to cancel `n` in the premise `"H"`.Robbert KrebbersRobbert Krebbershttps://gitlab.mpi-sws.org/iris/iris/-/issues/141Make `iNext` smarter for mixed `▷` and `▷^n`2018-01-27T16:11:56ZRobbert KrebbersMake `iNext` smarter for mixed `▷` and `▷^n`See below:
```coq
From iris Require Import proofmode.tactics.
Lemma foo {M} (P : uPred M) n : ▷ ▷^n P ⊢ ▷^n ▷ P.
Proof. iIntros "H". iNext.
(* Gives
"H" : ▷ ▷^n P
--------------------------------------∗
▷ P
*)
```See below:
```coq
From iris Require Import proofmode.tactics.
Lemma foo {M} (P : uPred M) n : ▷ ▷^n P ⊢ ▷^n ▷ P.
Proof. iIntros "H". iNext.
(* Gives
"H" : ▷ ▷^n P
--------------------------------------∗
▷ P
*)
```Robbert KrebbersRobbert Krebbershttps://gitlab.mpi-sws.org/iris/iris/-/issues/155Make `iPureIntro` able to introduce affine pure assertions when the context i...2018-02-15T16:08:05ZJacques-Henri JourdanMake `iPureIntro` able to introduce affine pure assertions when the context is emtpy.The current lemma behind `iPureIntro` is:
```coq
Lemma tac_pure_intro Δ Q φ : FromPure false Q φ → φ → envs_entails Δ Q.
Proof. intros ??. rewrite /envs_entails -(from_pure _ Q). by apply pure_intro. Qed.
```
Could we change it a bit, ...The current lemma behind `iPureIntro` is:
```coq
Lemma tac_pure_intro Δ Q φ : FromPure false Q φ → φ → envs_entails Δ Q.
Proof. intros ??. rewrite /envs_entails -(from_pure _ Q). by apply pure_intro. Qed.
```
Could we change it a bit, so that we ask for `FromPure true Q φ` when the context is empty? That way, we could introduce CFML's affine pure assertions transparently when the context is empty.Robbert KrebbersRobbert Krebbershttps://gitlab.mpi-sws.org/iris/iris/-/issues/343Make CI fail when proofs depend on auto-generated names2021-04-12T17:11:13ZRalf Jungjung@mpi-sws.orgMake CI fail when proofs depend on auto-generated namesWe already did it in std++, now [that this is fixed](https://github.com/coq/coq/issues/12944) it is time to do the same in Iris: make CI ensure that we do not use auto-generated names.We already did it in std++, now [that this is fixed](https://github.com/coq/coq/issues/12944) it is time to do the same in Iris: make CI ensure that we do not use auto-generated names.https://gitlab.mpi-sws.org/iris/iris/-/issues/158Make clear which arguments of tactics are optional in `ProofMode.md`2020-12-19T17:43:20ZRobbert KrebbersMake clear which arguments of tactics are optional in `ProofMode.md`See the discussion in https://gitlab.mpi-sws.org/FP/iris-coq/merge_requests/116#note_25050See the discussion in https://gitlab.mpi-sws.org/FP/iris-coq/merge_requests/116#note_25050https://gitlab.mpi-sws.org/iris/iris/-/issues/30Make coqchk (make verify) work2016-08-19T10:00:16ZRalf Jungjung@mpi-sws.orgMake coqchk (make verify) workCurrently, `make verify` fails with a stack overflow while checking `iris.prelude.pretty.pretty_N_inj`. We had a similar issue with another lemma in the same file, and Guillaume found a work-around for it (see https://coq.inria.fr/bugs/s...Currently, `make verify` fails with a stack overflow while checking `iris.prelude.pretty.pretty_N_inj`. We had a similar issue with another lemma in the same file, and Guillaume found a work-around for it (see https://coq.inria.fr/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=4788). Can we find a similar work-around here?
Cc @robbertkrebbers