 18 Aug, 2016 2 commits


JacquesHenri Jourdan authored

JacquesHenri Jourdan authored

 11 Aug, 2016 1 commit


Robbert Krebbers authored
It is not nonexpansive, so not a function we should use.

 10 Aug, 2016 1 commit


Zhen Zhang authored

 09 Aug, 2016 4 commits


Ralf Jung authored

Ralf Jung authored

Robbert Krebbers authored

Ralf Jung authored

 08 Aug, 2016 10 commits


Ralf Jung authored

Derek Dreyer authored

Robbert Krebbers authored
This generalization is surprisingly easy in Iris 3.0, so I could not resist not doing it :).

Robbert Krebbers authored
This makes stuff more uniform and also removes the need for the [inGFs] type class. Instead, there is now a type class [subG Σ1 Σ2] which expresses that a list of functors [Σ1] is contained in [Σ2].

Robbert Krebbers authored

Ralf Jung authored

Ralf Jung authored

Ralf Jung authored
I do not know why we have to split the rewrite here, but it seems we do.

Robbert Krebbers authored
This is probably due to a bug in the rewrite of ssreflect 1.6 which has been fixed in ssreflect master.

Ralf Jung authored

 06 Aug, 2016 2 commits


Robbert Krebbers authored
I cannot reproduce the error of the CI builder on my machine with the same version of Coq (8.5pl2).

Robbert Krebbers authored

 05 Aug, 2016 16 commits


Robbert Krebbers authored
And make it Typeclasses Opaque to ensure that we indeed do not do so using the proof mode.

Robbert Krebbers authored
Instead of having connectives pvs0 and pvs1 we now have one connective pvs that is indexed by a Boolean.

Robbert Krebbers authored

Robbert Krebbers authored

Robbert Krebbers authored
Use it to prove that tests/barrier_client and tests/heap_lang are adequate.

Robbert Krebbers authored

Robbert Krebbers authored

Ralf Jung authored

Ralf Jung authored

Ralf Jung authored

Ralf Jung authored

Ralf Jung authored

Ralf Jung authored

Robbert Krebbers authored

Robbert Krebbers authored
Also make those for introduction and elimination more symmetric: !% pure introduction % pure elimination !# always introduction # always elimination !> later introduction > pat timeless later elimination !==> view shift introduction ==> pat view shift elimination

Robbert Krebbers authored
This commit features:  A simpler model. The recursive domain equation no longer involves a triple containing invariants, physical state and ghost state, but just ghost state. Invariants and physical state are encoded using (higherorder) ghost state.  (Primitive) view shifts are formalized in the logic and all properties about it are proven in the logic instead of the model. Instead, the core logic features only a notion of raw view shifts which internalizing performing frame preserving updates.  A better behaved notion of mask changing view shifts. In particular, we no longer have sideconditions on transitivity of view shifts, and we have a rule for introduction of mask changing view shifts ={E1,E2}=> P with E2 ⊆ E1 which allows to postpone performing a view shift.  The weakest precondition connective is formalized in the logic using Banach's fixpoint. All properties about the connective are proven in the logic instead of directly in the model.  Adequacy is proven in the logic and uses a primitive form of adequacy for uPred that only involves raw views shifts and laters. Some remarks:  I have removed binary view shifts. I did not see a way to describe all rules of the new mask changing view shifts using those.  There is no longer the need for the notion of "frame shifting assertions" and these are thus removed. The rules for Hoare triples are thus also stated in terms of primitive view shifts. TODO:  Maybe rename primitive view shift into something more sensible  Figure out a way to deal with closed proofs (see the commented out stuff in tests/heap_lang and tests/barrier_client).

 04 Aug, 2016 4 commits


Robbert Krebbers authored

Robbert Krebbers authored
1.) iDestruct is able turns
↔ into two implications (because uPred_iff is (type classes) transparent). 2.) iApply only backtracks on turning P↔ Q into P → Q or Q → P when there are no future premises. This is not the case for 'P↔ □ (P → False)'. 
Robbert Krebbers authored
It not behaves more consistently with iExact and thus also works in the case H : P ★ □^n Q  Q.

Ralf Jung authored
show that even \later^n False is inconsistent (for any fixed n); properly use pvs in counter_examples
