Commit c490d858 by Robbert Krebbers

An axiomatization and implementation of machine integers.

parent c7fe8cd2
 ... @@ -120,6 +120,12 @@ Instance sum_inhabited_r {A B} (iB : Inhabited A) : Inhabited (A + B) := ... @@ -120,6 +120,12 @@ Instance sum_inhabited_r {A B} (iB : Inhabited A) : Inhabited (A + B) := end. end. Instance option_inhabited {A} : Inhabited (option A) := populate None. Instance option_inhabited {A} : Inhabited (option A) := populate None. (** ** Proof irrelevant types *) (** This type class collects types that are proof irrelevant. That means, all elements of the type are equal. We use this notion only used for propositions, but by universe polymorphism we can generalize it. *) Class ProofIrrel (A : Type) : Prop := proof_irrel (x y : A) : x = y. (** ** Setoid equality *) (** ** Setoid equality *) (** We define an operational type class for setoid equality. This is based on (** We define an operational type class for setoid equality. This is based on (Spitters/van der Weegen, 2011). *) (Spitters/van der Weegen, 2011). *) ... ...
 ... @@ -3,7 +3,7 @@ ... @@ -3,7 +3,7 @@ (** This file collects theorems, definitions, tactics, related to propositions (** This file collects theorems, definitions, tactics, related to propositions with a decidable equality. Such propositions are collected by the [Decision] with a decidable equality. Such propositions are collected by the [Decision] type class. *) type class. *) Require Export base tactics. Require Export proof_irrel. Hint Extern 200 (Decision _) => progress (lazy beta) : typeclass_instances. Hint Extern 200 (Decision _) => progress (lazy beta) : typeclass_instances. ... @@ -24,28 +24,38 @@ Lemma decide_rel_correct {A B} (R : A → B → Prop) `{∀ x y, Decision (R x y ... @@ -24,28 +24,38 @@ Lemma decide_rel_correct {A B} (R : A → B → Prop) `{∀ x y, Decision (R x y (x : A) (y : B) : decide_rel R x y = decide (R x y). (x : A) (y : B) : decide_rel R x y = decide (R x y). Proof. done. Qed. Proof. done. Qed. Lemma decide_true {A} `{Decision P} (x y : A) : P → (if decide P then x else y) = x. Proof. by destruct (decide P). Qed. Lemma decide_false {A} `{Decision P} (x y : A) : ¬P → (if decide P then x else y) = y. Proof. by destruct (decide P). Qed. (** The tactic [destruct_decide] destructs a sumbool [dec]. If one of the (** The tactic [destruct_decide] destructs a sumbool [dec]. If one of the components is double negated, it will try to remove the double negation. *) components is double negated, it will try to remove the double negation. *) Ltac destruct_decide dec := Tactic Notation "destruct_decide" constr(dec) "as" ident(H) := let H := fresh in destruct dec as [H|H]; destruct dec as [H|H]; try match type of H with try match type of H with | ¬¬_ => apply dec_stable in H | ¬¬_ => apply dec_stable in H end. end. Tactic Notation "destruct_decide" constr(dec) := let H := fresh in destruct_decide dec as H. (** The tactic [case_decide] performs case analysis on an arbitrary occurrence (** The tactic [case_decide] performs case analysis on an arbitrary occurrence of [decide] or [decide_rel] in the conclusion or hypotheses. *) of [decide] or [decide_rel] in the conclusion or hypotheses. *) Ltac case_decide := Tactic Notation "case_decide" "as" ident(Hd) := match goal with match goal with | H : context [@decide ?P ?dec] |- _ => | H : context [@decide ?P ?dec] |- _ => destruct_decide (@decide P dec) destruct_decide (@decide P dec) as Hd | H : context [@decide_rel _ _ ?R ?x ?y ?dec] |- _ => | H : context [@decide_rel _ _ ?R ?x ?y ?dec] |- _ => destruct_decide (@decide_rel _ _ R x y dec) destruct_decide (@decide_rel _ _ R x y dec) as Hd | |- context [@decide ?P ?dec] => | |- context [@decide ?P ?dec] => destruct_decide (@decide P dec) destruct_decide (@decide P dec) as Hd | |- context [@decide_rel _ _ ?R ?x ?y ?dec] => | |- context [@decide_rel _ _ ?R ?x ?y ?dec] => destruct_decide (@decide_rel _ _ R x y dec) destruct_decide (@decide_rel _ _ R x y dec) as Hd end. end. Tactic Notation "case_decide" := let H := fresh in case_decide as H. (** The tactic [solve_decision] uses Coq's [decide equality] tactic together (** The tactic [solve_decision] uses Coq's [decide equality] tactic together with instance resolution to automatically generate decision procedures. *) with instance resolution to automatically generate decision procedures. *) ... @@ -107,23 +117,11 @@ Definition dexist `{∀ x : A, Decision (P x)} (x : A) (p : P x) : dsig P := ... @@ -107,23 +117,11 @@ Definition dexist `{∀ x : A, Decision (P x)} (x : A) (p : P x) : dsig P := x↾bool_decide_pack _ p. x↾bool_decide_pack _ p. Lemma dsig_eq `(P : A → Prop) `{∀ x, Decision (P x)} Lemma dsig_eq `(P : A → Prop) `{∀ x, Decision (P x)} (x y : dsig P) : x = y ↔ `x = `y. (x y : dsig P) : x = y ↔ `x = `y. Proof. Proof. apply (sig_eq_pi _). Qed. split. * destruct x, y. apply proj1_sig_inj. * intro. destruct x as [x Hx], y as [y Hy]. simpl in *. subst. f_equal. revert Hx Hy. case (bool_decide (P y)). + by intros [] []. + done. Qed. Lemma dexists_proj1 `(P : A → Prop) `{∀ x, Decision (P x)} (x : dsig P) p : Lemma dexists_proj1 `(P : A → Prop) `{∀ x, Decision (P x)} (x : dsig P) p : dexist (`x) p = x. dexist (`x) p = x. Proof. by apply dsig_eq. Qed. Proof. by apply dsig_eq. Qed. Global Instance dsig_eq_dec `(P : A → Prop) `{∀ x, Decision (P x)} `{∀ x y : A, Decision (x = y)} (x y : dsig P) : Decision (x = y). Proof. refine (cast_if (decide (`x = `y))); by rewrite dsig_eq. Defined. (** * Instances of Decision *) (** * Instances of Decision *) (** Instances of [Decision] for operators of propositional logic. *) (** Instances of [Decision] for operators of propositional logic. *) Instance True_dec: Decision True := left I. Instance True_dec: Decision True := left I. ... @@ -164,3 +162,7 @@ Instance curry_dec `(P_dec : ∀ (x : A) (y : B), Decision (P x y)) p : ... @@ -164,3 +162,7 @@ Instance curry_dec `(P_dec : ∀ (x : A) (y : B), Decision (P x y)) p : end. end. Instance uncurry_dec `(P_dec : ∀ (p : A * B), Decision (P p)) x y : Instance uncurry_dec `(P_dec : ∀ (p : A * B), Decision (P p)) x y : Decision (uncurry P x y) := P_dec (x,y). Decision (uncurry P x y) := P_dec (x,y). Instance sig_eq_dec `(P : A → Prop) `{∀ x, ProofIrrel (P x)} `{∀ x y : A, Decision (x = y)} (x y : sig P) : Decision (x = y). Proof. refine (cast_if (decide (`x = `y))); by rewrite sig_eq_pi. Defined.
 ... @@ -812,6 +812,9 @@ Proof. ... @@ -812,6 +812,9 @@ Proof. revert i. revert i. induction n; intros [|?]; naive_solver auto with lia. induction n; intros [|?]; naive_solver auto with lia. Qed. Qed. Lemma replicate_S n (x : A) : replicate (S n) x = x :: replicate n x. Proof. done. Qed. Lemma replicate_plus n m (x : A) : Lemma replicate_plus n m (x : A) : replicate (n + m) x = replicate n x ++ replicate m x. replicate (n + m) x = replicate n x ++ replicate m x. Proof. induction n; simpl; f_equal; auto. Qed. Proof. induction n; simpl; f_equal; auto. Qed. ... @@ -829,6 +832,14 @@ Lemma drop_replicate_plus n m (x : A) : ... @@ -829,6 +832,14 @@ Lemma drop_replicate_plus n m (x : A) : drop n (replicate (n + m) x) = replicate m x. drop n (replicate (n + m) x) = replicate m x. Proof. rewrite drop_replicate. f_equal. lia. Qed. Proof. rewrite drop_replicate. f_equal. lia. Qed. Lemma reverse_replicate n (x : A) : reverse (replicate n x) = replicate n x. Proof. induction n as [|n IH]; [done|]. simpl. rewrite reverse_cons, IH. change [x] with (replicate 1 x). by rewrite <-replicate_plus, plus_comm. Qed. (** ** Properties of the [resize] function *) (** ** Properties of the [resize] function *) Lemma resize_spec (l : list A) n x : Lemma resize_spec (l : list A) n x : resize n x l = take n l ++ replicate (n - length l) x. resize n x l = take n l ++ replicate (n - length l) x. ... ...
 ... @@ -165,12 +165,26 @@ Notation "(<)" := Z.lt (only parsing) : Z_scope. ... @@ -165,12 +165,26 @@ Notation "(<)" := Z.lt (only parsing) : Z_scope. Infix "`div`" := Z.div (at level 35) : Z_scope. Infix "`div`" := Z.div (at level 35) : Z_scope. Infix "`mod`" := Z.modulo (at level 35) : Z_scope. Infix "`mod`" := Z.modulo (at level 35) : Z_scope. Infix "`quot`" := Z.quot (at level 35) : Z_scope. Infix "`rem`" := Z.rem (at level 35) : Z_scope. Instance Z_eq_dec: ∀ x y : Z, Decision (x = y) := Z.eq_dec. Instance Z_eq_dec: ∀ x y : Z, Decision (x = y) := Z.eq_dec. Instance Z_le_dec: ∀ x y : Z, Decision (x ≤ y)%Z := Z_le_dec. Instance Z_le_dec: ∀ x y : Z, Decision (x ≤ y)%Z := Z_le_dec. Instance Z_lt_dec: ∀ x y : Z, Decision (x < y)%Z := Z_lt_dec. Instance Z_lt_dec: ∀ x y : Z, Decision (x < y)%Z := Z_lt_dec. Instance Z_inhabited: Inhabited Z := populate 1%Z. Instance Z_inhabited: Inhabited Z := populate 1%Z. (* Note that we cannot disable simpl for [Z.of_nat] as that would break [omega] and [lia]. *) Arguments Z.to_nat _ : simpl never. Arguments Z.mul _ _ : simpl never. Arguments Z.add _ _ : simpl never. Arguments Z.opp _ : simpl never. Arguments Z.pow _ _ : simpl never. Arguments Z.div _ _ : simpl never. Arguments Z.modulo _ _ : simpl never. Arguments Z.quot _ _ : simpl never. Arguments Z.rem _ _ : simpl never. (** * Notations and properties of [Qc] *) (** * Notations and properties of [Qc] *) Notation "2" := (1+1)%Qc : Qc_scope. Notation "2" := (1+1)%Qc : Qc_scope. Infix "≤" := Qcle : Qc_scope. Infix "≤" := Qcle : Qc_scope. ... ...
 (* Copyright (c) 2012-2013, Robbert Krebbers. *) (* This file is distributed under the terms of the BSD license. *) (** This file collects facts on proof irrelevant types/propositions. *) Require Export Eqdep_dec tactics. Hint Extern 200 (ProofIrrel _) => progress (lazy beta) : typeclass_instances. Instance: ProofIrrel True. Proof. by intros [] []. Qed. Instance: ProofIrrel False. Proof. by intros []. Qed. Instance and_pi (A B : Prop) : ProofIrrel A → ProofIrrel B → ProofIrrel (A ∧ B). Proof. intros ?? [??] [??]. by f_equal. Qed. Instance prod_pi (A B : Type) : ProofIrrel A → ProofIrrel B → ProofIrrel (A * B). Proof. intros ?? [??] [??]. by f_equal. Qed. Instance eq_pi {A} `{∀ x y : A, Decision (x = y)} (x y : A) : ProofIrrel (x = y). Proof. intros ??. apply eq_proofs_unicity. intros x' y'. destruct (decide (x' = y')); tauto. Qed. Instance Is_true_pi (b : bool) : ProofIrrel (Is_true b). Proof. destruct b; simpl; apply _. Qed. Lemma sig_eq_pi `(P : A → Prop) `{∀ x, ProofIrrel (P x)} (x y : sig P) : x = y ↔ `x = `y. Proof. split. * destruct x, y. apply proj1_sig_inj. * destruct x as [x Hx], y as [y Hy]; simpl; intros; subst. f_equal. apply proof_irrel. Qed. Lemma exists_proj1_pi `(P : A → Prop) `{∀ x, ProofIrrel (P x)} (x : sig P) p : `x ↾ p = x. Proof. by apply (sig_eq_pi _). Qed.
Markdown is supported
0% or
You are about to add 0 people to the discussion. Proceed with caution.
Finish editing this message first!
Please register or to comment