Skip to content

GitLab

  • Projects
  • Groups
  • Snippets
  • Help
    • Loading...
  • Help
    • Help
    • Support
    • Community forum
    • Submit feedback
    • Contribute to GitLab
  • Sign in / Register
I
Iris
  • Project overview
    • Project overview
    • Details
    • Activity
    • Releases
  • Repository
    • Repository
    • Files
    • Commits
    • Branches
    • Tags
    • Contributors
    • Graph
    • Compare
  • Issues 122
    • Issues 122
    • List
    • Boards
    • Labels
    • Service Desk
    • Milestones
  • Merge Requests 19
    • Merge Requests 19
  • CI / CD
    • CI / CD
    • Pipelines
    • Jobs
    • Schedules
  • Operations
    • Operations
    • Incidents
    • Environments
  • Analytics
    • Analytics
    • CI / CD
    • Repository
    • Value Stream
  • Wiki
    • Wiki
  • Members
    • Members
  • Activity
  • Graph
  • Create a new issue
  • Jobs
  • Commits
  • Issue Boards
Collapse sidebar
  • Iris
  • Iris
  • Issues
  • #100

Closed
Open
Opened Sep 29, 2017 by Ralf Jung@jungOwner

Proof mode notation broken depending on import order

It is a long-standing issue that sometimes, depending on the order of re-exports and imports, the proof mode notation is broken. I finally decided to minimize this, and you can find the result in the ipm-notation-broken branch. I first thought this is a Coq bug, but now I am not so sure anymore: We do have different notations in the same scope that lead to printing being ambiguous.

Namely, we have

Notation "P ⊢ Q" := (uPred_entails P%I Q%I)
  (at level 99, Q at level 200, right associativity) : C_scope.

and

Notation "Γ '--------------------------------------' □ Δ '--------------------------------------' ∗ Q" :=
  (of_envs (Envs Γ Δ) ⊢ Q%I)
  (at level 1, Q at level 200, left associativity,
  format "Γ '--------------------------------------' □ '//' Δ '--------------------------------------' ∗ '//' Q '//'", only printing) :
  C_scope.

We seem to be relying on a guarantee that if one notation is strictly more specific than another one, it will have higher priority. Does Coq claim to have such a guarantee?

Maybe one possible solution would be to move the proof mode notations into a different scope, and have iStartProof introduce that scope (i.e., turn the goal into (...)%ProofMode).

Edited Oct 27, 2017 by Ralf Jung
Assignee
Assign to
Iris 3.1
Milestone
Iris 3.1
Assign milestone
Time tracking
None
Due date
None
Reference: iris/iris#100