 22 Nov, 2017 3 commits


Robbert Krebbers authored
It used to be an inline pattern match. This also restores compatibility with Coq 8.6.1.

Robbert Krebbers authored

Ralf Jung authored
saved predicates: use ofe_fun, not ofe_mor See merge request FP/iriscoq!86

 21 Nov, 2017 5 commits


Robbert Krebbers authored

Ralf Jung authored

Robbert Krebbers authored


Ralf Jung authored

 20 Nov, 2017 2 commits


Robbert Krebbers authored

Robbert Krebbers authored

 18 Nov, 2017 2 commits
 16 Nov, 2017 3 commits


Robbert Krebbers authored


Ralf Jung authored

 15 Nov, 2017 13 commits


Robbert Krebbers authored

Ralf Jung authored

Ralf Jung authored

Robbert Krebbers authored

Robbert Krebbers authored

Robbert Krebbers authored

Robbert Krebbers authored
It does not really help since the main work of the proof is in showing that `cFunctor_map F (iProp_fold, iProp_unfold)` is injective, but whatever.

Robbert Krebbers authored

Ralf Jung authored

Ralf Jung authored

Ralf Jung authored

Ralf Jung authored

Ralf Jung authored
Fix typo in definition of weakest pre in documentation. See merge request FP/iriscoq!84

 14 Nov, 2017 4 commits


Joseph Tassarotti authored

JacquesHenri Jourdan authored

Robbert Krebbers authored

Robbert Krebbers authored
This is an old flag set by the ssr plugin, and recently unset in coqstdpp, see https://gitlab.mpisws.org/robbertkrebbers/coqstdpp/issues/5.

 13 Nov, 2017 7 commits


Robbert Krebbers authored

Robbert authored
Improved treatment of anonymous hypotheses in the proof mode See merge request FP/iriscoq!83

Robbert Krebbers authored

Robbert Krebbers authored

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.

Robbert Krebbers authored

Robbert Krebbers authored

 12 Nov, 2017 1 commit


Robbert Krebbers authored
