1. 23 Nov, 2017 3 commits
  2. 22 Nov, 2017 3 commits
  3. 21 Nov, 2017 5 commits
  4. 20 Nov, 2017 2 commits
  5. 18 Nov, 2017 2 commits
  6. 16 Nov, 2017 3 commits
  7. 15 Nov, 2017 13 commits
  8. 14 Nov, 2017 4 commits
  9. 13 Nov, 2017 5 commits
    • Robbert Krebbers's avatar
      Remove spurious `iStartProof`. · 650261fc
      Robbert Krebbers authored
    • Robbert Krebbers's avatar
      Merge branch 'robbert/proofmode_anon_hyps' into 'master' · b6269993
      Robbert Krebbers authored
      Improved treatment of anonymous hypotheses in the proof mode
      See merge request FP/iris-coq!83
    • Robbert Krebbers's avatar
    • Robbert Krebbers's avatar
    • Robbert Krebbers's avatar
      Improved treatment of anonymous hypotheses in the proof mode. · bb3584e7
      Robbert Krebbers authored
      The proof mode now explicitly keeps track of anonymous hypotheses (i.e.
      hypotheses that are introduced by the introduction pattern `?`). Consider:
        Lemma foo {M} (P Q R : uPred M) : P -∗ (Q ∗ R) -∗ Q ∗ P.
        Proof. iIntros "? [H ?]". iFrame "H". iFrame. Qed.
      After the `iIntros`, the goal will be:
        _ : P
        "H" : Q
        _ : R
        Q ∗ P
      Anonymous hypotheses are displayed in a special way (`_ : P`). An important
      property of the new anonymous hypotheses is that it is no longer possible to
      refer to them by name, whereas before, anonymous hypotheses were given some
      arbitrary fresh name (typically prefixed by `~`).
      Note tactics can still operate on these anonymous hypotheses. For example, both
      `iFrame` and `iAssumption`, as well as the symbolic execution tactics, will
      use them. The only thing that is not possible is to refer to them yourself,
      for example, in an introduction, specialization or selection pattern.
      Advantages of the new approach:
      - Proofs become more robust as one cannot accidentally refer to anonymous
        hypotheses by their fresh name.
      - Fresh name generation becomes considerably easier. Since anonymous hypotheses
        are internally represented by natural numbers (of type `N`), we can just fold
        over the hypotheses and take the max plus one. This thus solve issue #101.