ProofMode.md 11 KB
Newer Older
1 2 3
Tactic overview
===============

4 5
Many of the tactics below apply to more goals than described in this document
since the behavior of these tactics can be tuned via instances of the type
6
classes in the file [proofmode/classes](proofmode/classes.v). Most notable, many
7
of the tactics can be applied when the to be introduced or to be eliminated
8 9
connective appears under a later, an update modality, or in the conclusion of a
weakest precondition.
10

11 12 13 14 15
Applying hypotheses and lemmas
------------------------------

- `iExact "H"`  : finish the goal if the conclusion matches the hypothesis `H`
- `iAssumption` : finish the goal if the conclusion matches any hypothesis
16
- `iApply pm_trm` : match the conclusion of the current goal against the
17 18
  conclusion of `pm_trm` and generates goals for the premises of `pm_trm`. See
  proof mode terms below.
19 20 21 22

Context management
------------------

23
- `iIntros (x1 ... xn) "ipat1 ... ipatn"` : introduce universal quantifiers
24 25
  using Coq introduction patterns `x1 ... xn` and implications/wands using proof
  mode introduction patterns `ipat1 ... ipatn`.
26 27 28 29 30 31
- `iClear (x1 ... xn) "selpat"` : clear the hypotheses given by the selection
  pattern `selpat` and the Coq level hypotheses/variables `x1 ... xn`.
- `iRevert (x1 ... xn) "selpat"` : revert the hypotheses given by the selection
  pattern `selpat` into wands, and the Coq level hypotheses/variables
  `x1 ... xn` into universal quantifiers. Persistent hypotheses are wrapped into
  the always modality.
32
- `iRename "H1" into "H2"` : rename the hypothesis `H1` into `H2`.
33 34
- `iSpecialize pm_trm` : instantiate universal quantifiers and eliminate
  implications/wands of a hypothesis `pm_trm`. See proof mode terms below.
35 36 37 38
- `iSpecialize pm_trm as #` : instantiate universal quantifiers and eliminate
  implications/wands of a hypothesis whose conclusion is persistent. In this
  case, all hypotheses can be used for proving the premises, as well as for
  the resulting goal.
39 40
- `iPoseProof pm_trm as "H"` : put `pm_trm` into the context as a new hypothesis
  `H`.
41 42
- `iAssert P with "spat" as "ipat"` : create a new goal with conclusion `P` and
  put `P` in the context of the original goal. The specialization pattern
43
  `spat` specifies which hypotheses will be consumed by proving `P`. The
44
  introduction pattern `ipat` specifies how to eliminate `P`.
45 46
- `iAssert P with "spat" as %cpat` : assert `P` and eliminate it using the Coq
  introduction pattern `cpat`.
47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60

Introduction of logical connectives
-----------------------------------

- `iPureIntro` : turn a pure goal into a Coq goal. This tactic works for goals
  of the shape `■ φ`, `a ≡ b` on discrete COFEs, and `✓ a` on discrete CMRAs.

- `iLeft` : left introduction of disjunction.
- `iRight` : right introduction of disjunction.

- `iSplit` : introduction of a conjunction, or separating conjunction provided
  one of the operands is persistent.
- `iSplitL "H1 ... Hn"` : introduction of a separating conjunction. The
  hypotheses `H1 ... Hn` are used for the left conjunct, and the remaining ones
61 62
  for the right conjunct. Persistent hypotheses are ignored, since these do not
  need to be split.
63 64 65 66 67 68 69
- `iSplitR "H0 ... Hn"` : symmetric version of the above.
- `iExist t1, .., tn` : introduction of an existential quantifier.

Elimination of logical connectives
----------------------------------

- `iExFalso` : Ex falso sequitur quod libet.
70 71 72 73 74 75 76
- `iDestruct pm_trm as (x1 ... xn) "ipat"` : elimination of existential
  quantifiers using Coq introduction patterns `x1 ... xn` and elimination of
  object level connectives using the proof mode introduction pattern `ipat`.
  In case all branches of `ipat` start with an `#` (moving the hypothesis to the
  persistent context) or `%` (moving the hypothesis to the pure Coq context),
  one can use all hypotheses for proving the premises of `pm_trm`, as well as
  for proving the resulting goal.
77
- `iDestruct pm_trm as %cpat` : elimination of a pure hypothesis using the Coq
78 79 80
  introduction pattern `cpat`. When using this tactic, all hypotheses can be
  used for proving the premises of `pm_trm`, as well as for proving the
  resulting goal.
81 82 83 84

Separating logic specific tactics
---------------------------------

85 86 87
- `iFrame (t1 .. tn) "selpat"` : cancel the Coq terms (or Coq hypotheses)
  `t1 ... tn` and Iris hypotheses given by `selpat` in the goal. The constructs
  of the selection pattern have the following meaning:
88 89 90 91 92 93 94

  + `%` : repeatedly frame hypotheses from the Coq context.
  + `#` : repeatedly frame hypotheses from the persistent context.
  + `★` : frame as much of the spatial context as possible.

  Notice that framing spatial hypotheses makes them disappear, but framing Coq
  or persistent hypotheses does not make them disappear.
95 96 97

  This tactic finishes the goal in case everything in the conclusion has been
  framed.
98 99 100
- `iCombine "H1" "H2" as "H"` : turns `H1 : P1` and `H2 : P2` into
  `H : P1 ★ P2`.

101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110
Modalities
----------

- `iModIntro` : introduction of a modality that is an instance of the
  `IntoModal` type class. Instances include: later, except 0, basic update and
  fancy update.
- `iMod pm_trm as (x1 ... xn) "ipat"` : eliminate a modality `pm_trm` that is
  an instance of the `ElimModal` type class. Instances include: later, except 0,
  basic update and fancy update.

111 112
The later modality
------------------
113

114
- `iNext` : introduce a later by stripping laters from all hypotheses.
115 116 117 118
- `iLöb as "IH" forall (x1 ... xn)` : perform Löb induction by generating a
  hypothesis `IH : ▷ goal`. The tactic generalizes over the Coq level variables
  `x1 ... xn`, the hypotheses given by the selection pattern `selpat`, and the
  spatial context.
119

Robbert Krebbers's avatar
Robbert Krebbers committed
120 121
Induction
---------
122

123 124
- `iInduction x as cpat "IH" forall (x1 ... xn) "selpat"` : perform induction on
  the Coq term `x`. The Coq introduction pattern is used to name the introduced
125 126
  variables. The induction hypotheses are inserted into the persistent context
  and given fresh names prefixed `IH`. The tactic generalizes over the Coq level
127 128
  variables `x1 ... xn`, the hypotheses given by the selection pattern `selpat`,
  and the spatial context.
Robbert Krebbers's avatar
Robbert Krebbers committed
129

130 131 132
Rewriting
---------

133 134
- `iRewrite pm_trm` : rewrite an equality in the conclusion.
- `iRewrite pm_trm in "H"` : rewrite an equality in the hypothesis `H`.
135 136 137 138

Iris
----

139 140
- `iInv N as (x1 ... xn) "ipat" "Hclose"` : open the invariant `N`, the update
  for closing the invariant is put in a hypothesis named `Hclose`.
141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148

Miscellaneous
-------------

- The tactic `done` is extended so that it also performs `iAssumption` and
  introduces pure connectives.
- The proof mode adds hints to the core `eauto` database so that `eauto`
  automatically introduces: conjunctions and disjunctions, universal and
149 150
  existential quantifiers, implications and wand, always, later and update
  modalities, and pure connectives.
151

152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163
Selection patterns
==================

Selection patterns are used to select hypotheses in the tactics `iRevert`,
`iClear`, `iFrame`, `iLöb` and `iInduction`. The proof mode supports the
following _selection patterns_:

- `H` : select the hypothesis named `H`.
- `%` : select the entire pure/Coq context.
- `#` : select the entire persistent context.
- `★` : select the entire spatial context.

164 165 166 167 168
Introduction patterns
=====================

Introduction patterns are used to perform introductions and eliminations of
multiple connectives on the fly. The proof mode supports the following
169
_introduction patterns_:
170

171
- `H` : create a hypothesis named `H`.
172 173 174 175
- `?` : create an anonymous hypothesis.
- `_` : remove the hypothesis.
- `$` : frame the hypothesis in the goal.
- `[ipat ipat]` : (separating) conjunction elimination.
Ralf Jung's avatar
Ralf Jung committed
176
- `[ipat|ipat]` : disjunction elimination.
177
- `[]` : false elimination.
178 179
- `%` : move the hypothesis to the pure Coq context (anonymously).
- `# ipat` : move the hypothesis to the persistent context.
180
- `> ipat` : eliminate a modality (if the goal permits).
181 182 183 184 185 186

Apart from this, there are the following introduction patterns that can only
appear at the top level:

- `{H1 ... Hn}` : clear `H1 ... Hn`.
- `{$H1 ... $Hn}` : frame `H1 ... Hn` (this pattern can be mixed with the
Robbert Krebbers's avatar
Robbert Krebbers committed
187
  previous pattern, e.g., `{$H1 H2 $H3}`).
188 189
- `!%` : introduce a pure goal (and leave the proof mode).
- `!#` : introduce an always modality (given that the spatial context is empty).
190
- `!>` : introduce a modality.
191 192 193 194 195
- `/=` : perform `simpl`.
- `*` : introduce all universal quantifiers.
- `**` : introduce all universal quantifiers, as well as all arrows and wands.

For example, given:
196

197
        ∀ x, x = 0 ⊢ □ (P → False ∨ □ (Q ∧ ▷ R) -★ P ★ ▷ (R ★ Q ∧ x = pred 2)).
198

199
You can write
200

201
        iIntros (x) "% !# $ [[] | #[HQ HR]] /= !>".
202 203

which results in:
204

205 206 207
        x : nat
        H : x = 0
        ______________________________________(1/1)
Robbert Krebbers's avatar
Robbert Krebbers committed
208
        "HQ" : Q
209 210 211
        "HR" : R
        --------------------------------------□
        R ★ Q ∧ x = 1
212 213


214 215
Specialization patterns
=======================
216

217
Since we are reasoning in a spatial logic, when eliminating a lemma or
218
hypothesis of type ``P_0 -★ ... -★ P_n -★ R``, one has to specify how the
219
hypotheses are split between the premises. The proof mode supports the following
220
_specification patterns_ to express splitting of hypotheses:
221

222 223
- `H` : use the hypothesis `H` (it should match the premise exactly). If `H` is
  spatial, it will be consumed.
224 225 226 227
- `[H1 ... Hn]` : generate a goal with the (spatial) hypotheses `H1 ... Hn` and
  all persistent hypotheses. The spatial hypotheses among `H1 ... Hn` will be
  consumed. Hypotheses may be prefixed with a `$`, which results in them being
  framed in the generated goal.
228
- `[-H1 ... Hn]`  : negated form of the above pattern.
229 230 231
- `>[H1 ... Hn]` : same as the above pattern, but can only be used if the goal
  is a modality, in which case the modality will be kept in the generated goal
  for the premise will be wrapped into the modality.
232 233 234
- `[#]` : This pattern can be used when eliminating `P -★ Q` with `P`
  persistent. Using this pattern, all hypotheses are available in the goal for
  `P`, as well the remaining goal.
235 236 237
- `[%]` : This pattern can be used when eliminating `P -★ Q` when `P` is pure.
  It will generate a Coq goal for `P` and does not consume any hypotheses.
- `*` : instantiate all top-level universal quantifiers with meta variables.
238

239
For example, given:
240

241
        H : □ P -★ P 2 -★ x = 0 -★ Q1 ∗ Q2
242

243
You can write:
244

245
        iDestruct ("H" with "[#] [H1 H2] [%]") as "[H4 H5]".
246

247 248 249 250 251 252
Proof mode terms
================

Many of the proof mode tactics (such as `iDestruct`, `iApply`, `iRewrite`) can
take both hypotheses and lemmas, and allow one to instantiate universal
quantifiers and implications/wands of these hypotheses/lemmas on the fly.
253

254
The syntax for the arguments of these tactics, called _proof mode terms_, is:
255

256
        (H $! t1 ... tn with "spat1 .. spatn")
257

258 259 260 261
Here, `H` can be both a hypothesis, as well as a Coq lemma whose conclusion is
of the shape `P ⊢ Q`. In the above, `t1 ... tn` are arbitrary Coq terms used
for instantiation of universal quantifiers, and `spat1 .. spatn` are
specialization patterns to eliminate implications and wands.
262

263
Proof mode terms can be written down using the following short hands too:
264

265 266 267
        (H with "spat1 .. spatn")
        (H $! t1 ... tn)
        H
268