Change the precedence of ⊢ to be the same as →, and the precedence of ⊣⊢ to

be the same as .

This is a fairly intrusive change, but at least makes notations more
consistent, and often shorter because fewer parentheses are needed. Note
that viewshifts already had the same precedence as →.

algebra/agree.v

@@ -136,7 +136,7 @@ Lemma to_agree_car n (x : agree A) : ✓{n} x → to_agree (x n) ≡{n}≡ x.
 Proof. intros [??]; split; naive_solver eauto using agree_valid_le. Qed.
 
 (** Internalized properties *)
-Lemma agree_equivI {M} a b : (to_agree a ≡ to_agree b) ⊣⊢ (a ≡ b : uPred M).
+Lemma agree_equivI {M} a b : to_agree a ≡ to_agree b ⊣⊢ (a ≡ b : uPred M).
 Proof.
   uPred.unseal. do 2 split. by intros [? Hv]; apply (Hv n). apply: to_agree_ne.
 Qed.

algebra/auth.v

@@ -164,14 +164,14 @@ Canonical Structure authUR :=
 
 (** Internalized properties *)
 Lemma auth_equivI {M} (x y : auth A) :
-  (x ≡ y) ⊣⊢ (authoritative x ≡ authoritative y ∧ own x ≡ own y : uPred M).
+  x ≡ y ⊣⊢ (authoritative x ≡ authoritative y ∧ own x ≡ own y : uPred M).
 Proof. by uPred.unseal. Qed.
 Lemma auth_validI {M} (x : auth A) :
-  (✓ x) ⊣⊢ (match authoritative x with
-             | Excl' a => (∃ b, a ≡ own x ⋅ b) ∧ ✓ a
-             | None => ✓ own x
-             | ExclBot' => False
-             end : uPred M).
+  ✓ x ⊣⊢ (match authoritative x with
+          | Excl' a => (∃ b, a ≡ own x ⋅ b) ∧ ✓ a
+          | None => ✓ own x
+          | ExclBot' => False
+          end : uPred M).
 Proof. uPred.unseal. by destruct x as [[[]|]]. Qed.
 
 Lemma auth_frag_op a b : ◯ (a ⋅ b) ≡ ◯ a ⋅ ◯ b.

algebra/csum.v

@@ -236,22 +236,22 @@ Proof. rewrite /Persistent /=. inversion_clear 1; by repeat constructor. Qed.
 
 (** Internalized properties *)
 Lemma csum_equivI {M} (x y : csum A B) :
-  (x ≡ y) ⊣⊢ (match x, y with
-               | Cinl a, Cinl a' => a ≡ a'
-               | Cinr b, Cinr b' => b ≡ b'
-               | CsumBot, CsumBot => True
-               | _, _ => False
-               end : uPred M).
+  x ≡ y ⊣⊢ (match x, y with
+            | Cinl a, Cinl a' => a ≡ a'
+            | Cinr b, Cinr b' => b ≡ b'
+            | CsumBot, CsumBot => True
+            | _, _ => False
+            end : uPred M).
 Proof.
   uPred.unseal; do 2 split; first by destruct 1.
   by destruct x, y; try destruct 1; try constructor.
 Qed.
 Lemma csum_validI {M} (x : csum A B) :
-  (✓ x) ⊣⊢ (match x with
-            | Cinl a => ✓ a
-            | Cinr b => ✓ b
-            | CsumBot => False
-            end : uPred M).
+  ✓ x ⊣⊢ (match x with
+          | Cinl a => ✓ a
+          | Cinr b => ✓ b
+          | CsumBot => False
+          end : uPred M).
 Proof. uPred.unseal. by destruct x. Qed.
 
 (** Updates *)

algebra/excl.v

@@ -102,11 +102,11 @@ Proof. split. apply _. by intros []. Qed.
 
 (** Internalized properties *)
 Lemma excl_equivI {M} (x y : excl A) :
-  (x ≡ y) ⊣⊢ (match x, y with
-               | Excl a, Excl b => a ≡ b
-               | ExclBot, ExclBot => True
-               | _, _ => False
-               end : uPred M).
+  x ≡ y ⊣⊢ (match x, y with
+            | Excl a, Excl b => a ≡ b
+            | ExclBot, ExclBot => True
+            | _, _ => False
+            end : uPred M).
 Proof.
   uPred.unseal. do 2 split. by destruct 1. by destruct x, y; try constructor.
 Qed.

algebra/frac.v

@@ -153,7 +153,7 @@ Proof. intros. by apply frac_validN_inv_l with 0 y, cmra_valid_validN. Qed.
 
 (** Internalized properties *)
 Lemma frac_equivI {M} (x y : frac A) :
-  (x ≡ y) ⊣⊢ (frac_perm x = frac_perm y ∧ frac_car x ≡ frac_car y : uPred M).
+  x ≡ y ⊣⊢ (frac_perm x = frac_perm y ∧ frac_car x ≡ frac_car y : uPred M).
 Proof. by uPred.unseal. Qed.
 Lemma frac_validI {M} (x : frac A) :
   ✓ x ⊣⊢ (■ (frac_perm x ≤ 1)%Qc ∧ ✓ frac_car x : uPred M).

algebra/gmap.v

@@ -171,9 +171,9 @@ Canonical Structure gmapUR :=
   UCMRAT (gmap K A) gmap_cofe_mixin gmap_cmra_mixin gmap_ucmra_mixin.
 
 (** Internalized properties *)
-Lemma gmap_equivI {M} m1 m2 : (m1 ≡ m2) ⊣⊢ (∀ i, m1 !! i ≡ m2 !! i : uPred M).
+Lemma gmap_equivI {M} m1 m2 : m1 ≡ m2 ⊣⊢ (∀ i, m1 !! i ≡ m2 !! i : uPred M).
 Proof. by uPred.unseal. Qed.
-Lemma gmap_validI {M} m : (✓ m) ⊣⊢ (∀ i, ✓ (m !! i) : uPred M).
+Lemma gmap_validI {M} m : ✓ m ⊣⊢ (∀ i, ✓ (m !! i) : uPred M).
 Proof. by uPred.unseal. Qed.
 End cmra.
 

algebra/iprod.v

@@ -139,9 +139,9 @@ Section iprod_cmra.
     UCMRAT (iprod B) iprod_cofe_mixin iprod_cmra_mixin iprod_ucmra_mixin.
 
   (** Internalized properties *)
-  Lemma iprod_equivI {M} g1 g2 : (g1 ≡ g2) ⊣⊢ (∀ i, g1 i ≡ g2 i : uPred M).
+  Lemma iprod_equivI {M} g1 g2 : g1 ≡ g2 ⊣⊢ (∀ i, g1 i ≡ g2 i : uPred M).
   Proof. by uPred.unseal. Qed.
-  Lemma iprod_validI {M} g : (✓ g) ⊣⊢ (∀ i, ✓ g i : uPred M).
+  Lemma iprod_validI {M} g : ✓ g ⊣⊢ (∀ i, ✓ g i : uPred M).
   Proof. by uPred.unseal. Qed.
 
   (** Properties of iprod_insert. *)

algebra/list.v

@@ -227,9 +227,9 @@ Section cmra.
   Qed.
 
   (** Internalized properties *)
-  Lemma list_equivI {M} l1 l2 : (l1 ≡ l2) ⊣⊢ (∀ i, l1 !! i ≡ l2 !! i : uPred M).
+  Lemma list_equivI {M} l1 l2 : l1 ≡ l2 ⊣⊢ (∀ i, l1 !! i ≡ l2 !! i : uPred M).
   Proof. uPred.unseal; constructor=> n x ?. apply list_dist_lookup. Qed.
-  Lemma list_validI {M} l : (✓ l) ⊣⊢ (∀ i, ✓ (l !! i) : uPred M).
+  Lemma list_validI {M} l : ✓ l ⊣⊢ (∀ i, ✓ (l !! i) : uPred M).
   Proof. uPred.unseal; constructor=> n x ?. apply list_lookup_validN. Qed.
 End cmra.
 

algebra/one_shot.v

@@ -196,22 +196,22 @@ Proof. rewrite /Persistent /=. inversion_clear 1; by repeat constructor. Qed.
 
 (** Internalized properties *)
 Lemma one_shot_equivI {M} (x y : one_shot A) :
-  (x ≡ y) ⊣⊢ (match x, y with
-               | OneShotPending, OneShotPending => True
-               | Shot a, Shot b => a ≡ b
-               | OneShotBot, OneShotBot => True
-               | _, _ => False
-               end : uPred M).
+  x ≡ y ⊣⊢ (match x, y with
+            | OneShotPending, OneShotPending => True
+            | Shot a, Shot b => a ≡ b
+            | OneShotBot, OneShotBot => True
+            | _, _ => False
+            end : uPred M).
 Proof.
   uPred.unseal; do 2 split; first by destruct 1.
   by destruct x, y; try destruct 1; try constructor.
 Qed.
 Lemma one_shot_validI {M} (x : one_shot A) :
-  (✓ x) ⊣⊢ (match x with
-            | Shot a => ✓ a 
-            | OneShotBot => False
-            | _ => True
-            end : uPred M).
+  ✓ x ⊣⊢ (match x with
+          | Shot a => ✓ a 
+          | OneShotBot => False
+          | _ => True
+          end : uPred M).
 Proof. uPred.unseal. by destruct x. Qed.
 
 (** Updates *)

algebra/upred_big_op.v

@@ -83,9 +83,9 @@ Proof.
   - etrans; eauto.
 Qed.
 
-Lemma big_and_app Ps Qs : [∧] (Ps ++ Qs) ⊣⊢ ([∧] Ps ∧ [∧] Qs).
+Lemma big_and_app Ps Qs : [∧] (Ps ++ Qs) ⊣⊢ [∧] Ps ∧ [∧] Qs.
 Proof. induction Ps as [|?? IH]; by rewrite /= ?left_id -?assoc ?IH. Qed.
-Lemma big_sep_app Ps Qs : [★] (Ps ++ Qs) ⊣⊢ ([★] Ps ★ [★] Qs).
+Lemma big_sep_app Ps Qs : [★] (Ps ++ Qs) ⊣⊢ [★] Ps ★ [★] Qs.
 Proof. by induction Ps as [|?? IH]; rewrite /= ?left_id -?assoc ?IH. Qed.
 
 Lemma big_and_contains Ps Qs : Qs `contains` Ps → [∧] Ps ⊢ [∧] Qs.
@@ -113,7 +113,7 @@ Section gmap.
 
   Lemma big_sepM_mono Φ Ψ m1 m2 :
     m2 ⊆ m1 → (∀ k x, m2 !! k = Some x → Φ k x ⊢ Ψ k x) →
-    ([★ map] k ↦ x ∈ m1, Φ k x) ⊢ ([★ map] k ↦ x ∈ m2, Ψ k x).
+    ([★ map] k ↦ x ∈ m1, Φ k x) ⊢ [★ map] k ↦ x ∈ m2, Ψ k x.
   Proof.
     intros HX HΦ. trans ([★ map] k↦x ∈ m2, Φ k x)%I.
     - by apply big_sep_contains, fmap_contains, map_to_list_contains.
@@ -152,12 +152,12 @@ Section gmap.
 
   Lemma big_sepM_insert Φ m i x :
     m !! i = None →
-    ([★ map] k↦y ∈ <[i:=x]> m, Φ k y) ⊣⊢ (Φ i x ★ [★ map] k↦y ∈ m, Φ k y).
+    ([★ map] k↦y ∈ <[i:=x]> m, Φ k y) ⊣⊢ Φ i x ★ [★ map] k↦y ∈ m, Φ k y.
   Proof. intros ?; by rewrite /uPred_big_sepM map_to_list_insert. Qed.
 
   Lemma big_sepM_delete Φ m i x :
     m !! i = Some x →
-    ([★ map] k↦y ∈ m, Φ k y) ⊣⊢ (Φ i x ★ [★ map] k↦y ∈ delete i m, Φ k y).
+    ([★ map] k↦y ∈ m, Φ k y) ⊣⊢ Φ i x ★ [★ map] k↦y ∈ delete i m, Φ k y.
   Proof.
     intros. rewrite -big_sepM_insert ?lookup_delete //.
     by rewrite insert_delete insert_id.
@@ -204,7 +204,7 @@ Section gmap.
 
   Lemma big_sepM_sepM Φ Ψ m :
        ([★ map] k↦x ∈ m, Φ k x ★ Ψ k x)
-    ⊣⊢ (([★ map] k↦x ∈ m, Φ k x) ★ ([★ map] k↦x ∈ m, Ψ k x)).
+    ⊣⊢ ([★ map] k↦x ∈ m, Φ k x) ★ ([★ map] k↦x ∈ m, Ψ k x).
   Proof.
     rewrite /uPred_big_sepM.
     induction (map_to_list m) as [|[i x] l IH]; csimpl; rewrite ?right_id //.
@@ -212,7 +212,7 @@ Section gmap.
   Qed.
 
   Lemma big_sepM_later Φ m :
-    (▷ [★ map] k↦x ∈ m, Φ k x) ⊣⊢ ([★ map] k↦x ∈ m, ▷ Φ k x).
+    ▷ ([★ map] k↦x ∈ m, Φ k x) ⊣⊢ ([★ map] k↦x ∈ m, ▷ Φ k x).
   Proof.
     rewrite /uPred_big_sepM.
     induction (map_to_list m) as [|[i x] l IH]; csimpl; rewrite ?later_True //.
@@ -228,7 +228,7 @@ Section gmap.
   Qed.
 
   Lemma big_sepM_always_if p Φ m :
-    (□?p [★ map] k↦x ∈ m, Φ k x) ⊣⊢ ([★ map] k↦x ∈ m, □?p Φ k x).
+    □?p ([★ map] k↦x ∈ m, Φ k x) ⊣⊢ ([★ map] k↦x ∈ m, □?p Φ k x).
   Proof. destruct p; simpl; auto using big_sepM_always. Qed.
 
   Lemma big_sepM_forall Φ m :
@@ -249,7 +249,7 @@ Section gmap.
   Qed.
 
   Lemma big_sepM_impl Φ Ψ m :
-      (□ (∀ k x, m !! k = Some x → Φ k x → Ψ k x) ∧ [★ map] k↦x ∈ m, Φ k x)
+    □ (∀ k x, m !! k = Some x → Φ k x → Ψ k x) ∧ ([★ map] k↦x ∈ m, Φ k x)
     ⊢ [★ map] k↦x ∈ m, Ψ k x.
   Proof.
     rewrite always_and_sep_l. do 2 setoid_rewrite always_forall.
@@ -267,7 +267,7 @@ Section gset.
 
   Lemma big_sepS_mono Φ Ψ X Y :
     Y ⊆ X → (∀ x, x ∈ Y → Φ x ⊢ Ψ x) →
-    ([★ set] x ∈ X, Φ x) ⊢ ([★ set] x ∈ Y, Ψ x).
+    ([★ set] x ∈ X, Φ x) ⊢ [★ set] x ∈ Y, Ψ x.
   Proof.
     intros HX HΦ. trans ([★ set] x ∈ Y, Φ x)%I.
     - by apply big_sep_contains, fmap_contains, elements_contains.
@@ -315,7 +315,7 @@ Section gset.
   Proof. apply (big_sepS_fn_insert (λ y, id)). Qed.
 
   Lemma big_sepS_delete Φ X x :
-    x ∈ X → ([★ set] y ∈ X, Φ y) ⊣⊢ (Φ x ★ [★ set] y ∈ X ∖ {[ x ]}, Φ y).
+    x ∈ X → ([★ set] y ∈ X, Φ y) ⊣⊢ Φ x ★ [★ set] y ∈ X ∖ {[ x ]}, Φ y.
   Proof.
     intros. rewrite -big_sepS_insert; last set_solver.
     by rewrite -union_difference_L; last set_solver.
@@ -328,21 +328,21 @@ Section gset.
   Proof. intros. by rewrite /uPred_big_sepS elements_singleton /= right_id. Qed.
 
   Lemma big_sepS_sepS Φ Ψ X :
-    ([★ set] y ∈ X, Φ y ★ Ψ y) ⊣⊢ (([★ set] y ∈ X, Φ y) ★ [★ set] y ∈ X, Ψ y).
+    ([★ set] y ∈ X, Φ y ★ Ψ y) ⊣⊢ ([★ set] y ∈ X, Φ y) ★ ([★ set] y ∈ X, Ψ y).
   Proof.
     rewrite /uPred_big_sepS.
     induction (elements X) as [|x l IH]; csimpl; first by rewrite ?right_id.
     by rewrite IH -!assoc (assoc _ (Ψ _)) [(Ψ _ ★ _)%I]comm -!assoc.
   Qed.
 
-  Lemma big_sepS_later Φ X : (▷ [★ set] y ∈ X, Φ y) ⊣⊢ ([★ set] y ∈ X, ▷ Φ y).
+  Lemma big_sepS_later Φ X : ▷ ([★ set] y ∈ X, Φ y) ⊣⊢ ([★ set] y ∈ X, ▷ Φ y).
   Proof.
     rewrite /uPred_big_sepS.
     induction (elements X) as [|x l IH]; csimpl; first by rewrite ?later_True.
     by rewrite later_sep IH.
   Qed.
 
-  Lemma big_sepS_always Φ X : (□ [★ set] y ∈ X, Φ y) ⊣⊢ ([★ set] y ∈ X, □ Φ y).
+  Lemma big_sepS_always Φ X : □ ([★ set] y ∈ X, Φ y) ⊣⊢ ([★ set] y ∈ X, □ Φ y).
   Proof.
     rewrite /uPred_big_sepS.
     induction (elements X) as [|x l IH]; csimpl; first by rewrite ?always_const.
@@ -350,7 +350,7 @@ Section gset.
   Qed.
 
   Lemma big_sepS_always_if q Φ X :
-    (□?q [★ set] y ∈ X, Φ y) ⊣⊢ ([★ set] y ∈ X, □?q Φ y).
+    □?q ([★ set] y ∈ X, Φ y) ⊣⊢ ([★ set] y ∈ X, □?q Φ y).
   Proof. destruct q; simpl; auto using big_sepS_always. Qed.
 
   Lemma big_sepS_forall Φ X :
@@ -369,7 +369,7 @@ Section gset.
   Qed.
 
   Lemma big_sepS_impl Φ Ψ X :
-      (□ (∀ x, ■ (x ∈ X) → Φ x → Ψ x) ∧ [★ set] x ∈ X, Φ x) ⊢ [★ set] x ∈ X, Ψ x.
+      □ (∀ x, ■ (x ∈ X) → Φ x → Ψ x) ∧ ([★ set] x ∈ X, Φ x) ⊢ [★ set] x ∈ X, Ψ x.
   Proof.
     rewrite always_and_sep_l always_forall.
     setoid_rewrite always_impl; setoid_rewrite always_const.

algebra/upred_tactics.v

@@ -86,7 +86,7 @@ Module uPred_reflection. Section uPred_reflection.
   Qed.
   Lemma cancel_entails Σ e1 e2 e1' e2' ns :
     cancel ns e1 = Some e1' → cancel ns e2 = Some e2' →
-    eval Σ e1' ⊢ eval Σ e2' → eval Σ e1 ⊢ eval Σ e2.
+    (eval Σ e1' ⊢ eval Σ e2') → eval Σ e1 ⊢ eval Σ e2.
   Proof.
     intros ??. rewrite !eval_flatten.
     rewrite (flatten_cancel e1 e1' ns) // (flatten_cancel e2 e2' ns) //; csimpl.

heap_lang/lib/barrier/proof.v

@@ -77,8 +77,8 @@ Proof. solve_proper. Qed.
 (** Helper lemmas *)
 Lemma ress_split i i1 i2 Q R1 R2 P I :
   i ∈ I → i1 ∉ I → i2 ∉ I → i1 ≠ i2 →
-  (saved_prop_own i Q ★ saved_prop_own i1 R1 ★ saved_prop_own i2 R2 ★
-    (Q -★ R1 ★ R2) ★ ress P I)
+  saved_prop_own i Q ★ saved_prop_own i1 R1 ★ saved_prop_own i2 R2 ★
+    (Q -★ R1 ★ R2) ★ ress P I
   ⊢ ress P ({[i1;i2]} ∪ I ∖ {[i]}).
 Proof.
   iIntros {????} "(#HQ&#H1&#H2&HQR&H)"; iDestruct "H" as {Ψ} "[HPΨ HΨ]".
@@ -97,7 +97,7 @@ Qed.
 (** Actual proofs *)
 Lemma newbarrier_spec (P : iProp) (Φ : val → iProp) :
   heapN ⊥ N →
-  (heap_ctx heapN ★ ∀ l, recv l P ★ send l P -★ Φ #l)
+  heap_ctx heapN ★ (∀ l, recv l P ★ send l P -★ Φ #l)
   ⊢ WP newbarrier #() {{ Φ }}.
 Proof.
   iIntros {HN} "[#? HΦ]".
@@ -124,7 +124,7 @@ Proof.
 Qed.
 
 Lemma signal_spec l P (Φ : val → iProp) :
-  (send l P ★ P ★ Φ #()) ⊢ WP signal #l {{ Φ }}.
+  send l P ★ P ★ Φ #() ⊢ WP signal #l {{ Φ }}.
 Proof.
   rewrite /signal /send /barrier_ctx.
   iIntros "(Hs&HP&HΦ)"; iDestruct "Hs" as {γ} "[#(%&Hh&Hsts) Hγ]". wp_let.
@@ -139,7 +139,7 @@ Proof.
 Qed.
 
 Lemma wait_spec l P (Φ : val → iProp) :
-  (recv l P ★ (P -★ Φ #())) ⊢ WP wait #l {{ Φ }}.
+  recv l P ★ (P -★ Φ #()) ⊢ WP wait #l {{ Φ }}.
 Proof.
   rename P into R; rewrite /recv /barrier_ctx.
   iIntros "[Hr HΦ]"; iDestruct "Hr" as {γ P Q i} "(#(%&Hh&Hsts)&Hγ&#HQ&HQR)".
@@ -200,7 +200,7 @@ Proof.
       by iIntros "> ?".
 Qed.
 
-Lemma recv_weaken l P1 P2 : (P1 -★ P2) ⊢ (recv l P1 -★ recv l P2).
+Lemma recv_weaken l P1 P2 : (P1 -★ P2) ⊢ recv l P1 -★ recv l P2.
 Proof.
   rewrite /recv.
   iIntros "HP HP1"; iDestruct "HP1" as {γ P Q i} "(#Hctx&Hγ&Hi&HP1)".
@@ -208,7 +208,7 @@ Proof.
   iIntros "> HQ". by iApply "HP"; iApply "HP1".
 Qed.
 
-Lemma recv_mono l P1 P2 : P1 ⊢ P2 → recv l P1 ⊢ recv l P2.
+Lemma recv_mono l P1 P2 : (P1 ⊢ P2) → recv l P1 ⊢ recv l P2.
 Proof.
   intros HP%entails_wand. apply wand_entails. rewrite HP. apply recv_weaken.
 Qed.

heap_lang/lib/barrier/specification.v

@@ -17,7 +17,7 @@ Lemma barrier_spec (heapN N : namespace) :
     (∀ l P, {{ send l P ★ P }} signal #l {{ _, True }}) ∧
     (∀ l P, {{ recv l P }} wait #l {{ _, P }}) ∧
     (∀ l P Q, recv l (P ★ Q) ={N}=> recv l P ★ recv l Q) ∧
-    (∀ l P Q, (P -★ Q) ⊢ (recv l P -★ recv l Q)).
+    (∀ l P Q, (P -★ Q) ⊢ recv l P -★ recv l Q).
 Proof.
   intros HN.
   exists (λ l, CofeMor (recv heapN N l)), (λ l, CofeMor (send heapN N l)).

heap_lang/lib/lock.v

@@ -51,8 +51,7 @@ Qed.
 
 Lemma newlock_spec N (R : iProp) Φ :
   heapN ⊥ N →
-  (heap_ctx heapN ★ R ★ (∀ l, is_lock l R -★ Φ #l))
-  ⊢ WP newlock #() {{ Φ }}.
+  heap_ctx heapN ★ R ★ (∀ l, is_lock l R -★ Φ #l) ⊢ WP newlock #() {{ Φ }}.
 Proof.
   iIntros {?} "(#Hh & HR & HΦ)". rewrite /newlock.
   wp_seq. iApply wp_pvs. wp_alloc l as "Hl".
@@ -63,7 +62,7 @@ Proof.
 Qed.
 
 Lemma acquire_spec l R (Φ : val → iProp) :
-  (is_lock l R ★ (locked l R -★ R -★ Φ #())) ⊢ WP acquire #l {{ Φ }}.
+  is_lock l R ★ (locked l R -★ R -★ Φ #()) ⊢ WP acquire #l {{ Φ }}.
 Proof.
   iIntros "[Hl HΦ]". iDestruct "Hl" as {N γ} "(%&#?&#?)".
   iLöb as "IH". wp_rec. wp_focus (CAS _ _ _)%E.
@@ -77,7 +76,7 @@ Proof.
 Qed.
 
 Lemma release_spec R l (Φ : val → iProp) :
-  (locked l R ★ R ★ Φ #()) ⊢ WP release #l {{ Φ }}.
+  locked l R ★ R ★ Φ #() ⊢ WP release #l {{ Φ }}.
 Proof.
   iIntros "(Hl&HR&HΦ)"; iDestruct "Hl" as {N γ} "(% & #? & #? & Hγ)".
   rewrite /release. wp_let. iInv N as {b} "[Hl _]".

heap_lang/lib/spawn.v

@@ -54,7 +54,7 @@ Proof. solve_proper. Qed.
 Lemma spawn_spec (Ψ : val → iProp) e (f : val) (Φ : val → iProp) :
   to_val e = Some f →
   heapN ⊥ N →
-  (heap_ctx heapN ★ WP f #() {{ Ψ }} ★ ∀ l, join_handle l Ψ -★ Φ #l)
+  heap_ctx heapN ★ WP f #() {{ Ψ }} ★ (∀ l, join_handle l Ψ -★ Φ #l)
   ⊢ WP spawn e {{ Φ }}.
 Proof.
   iIntros {<-%of_to_val ?} "(#Hh&Hf&HΦ)". rewrite /spawn.
@@ -72,7 +72,7 @@ Proof.
 Qed.
 
 Lemma join_spec (Ψ : val → iProp) l (Φ : val → iProp) :
-  (join_handle l Ψ ★ ∀ v, Ψ v -★ Φ v) ⊢ WP join #l {{ Φ }}.
+  join_handle l Ψ ★ (∀ v, Ψ v -★ Φ v) ⊢ WP join #l {{ Φ }}.
 Proof.
   rewrite /join_handle; iIntros "[[% H] Hv]"; iDestruct "H" as {γ} "(#?&Hγ&#?)".
   iLöb as "IH". wp_rec. wp_focus (! _)%E. iInv N as {v} "[Hl Hinv]".

heap_lang/proofmode.v

@@ -18,11 +18,11 @@ Proof. by rewrite /SepDestruct heap_mapsto_op_split. Qed.
 
 Lemma tac_wp_alloc Δ Δ' N E j e v Φ :
   to_val e = Some v → 
-  Δ ⊢ heap_ctx N → nclose N ⊆ E →
+  (Δ ⊢ heap_ctx N) → nclose N ⊆ E →
   StripLaterEnvs Δ Δ' →
   (∀ l, ∃ Δ'',
     envs_app false (Esnoc Enil j (l ↦ v)) Δ' = Some Δ'' ∧
-    Δ'' ⊢ Φ (LitV (LitLoc l))) →
+    (Δ'' ⊢ Φ (LitV (LitLoc l)))) →
   Δ ⊢ WP Alloc e @ E {{ Φ }}.
 Proof.
   intros ???? HΔ. rewrite -wp_alloc // -always_and_sep_l.
@@ -33,10 +33,10 @@ Proof.
 Qed.
 
 Lemma tac_wp_load Δ Δ' N E i l q v Φ :
-  Δ ⊢ heap_ctx N → nclose N ⊆ E →
+  (Δ ⊢ heap_ctx N) → nclose N ⊆ E →
   StripLaterEnvs Δ Δ' →
   envs_lookup i Δ' = Some (false, l ↦{q} v)%I →
-  Δ' ⊢ Φ v →
+  (Δ' ⊢ Φ v) →
   Δ ⊢ WP Load (Lit (LitLoc l)) @ E {{ Φ }}.
 Proof.
   intros. rewrite -wp_load // -always_and_sep_l. apply and_intro; first done.
@@ -46,11 +46,11 @@ Qed.
 
 Lemma tac_wp_store Δ Δ' Δ'' N E i l v e v' Φ :
   to_val e = Some v' →
-  Δ ⊢ heap_ctx N → nclose N ⊆ E →
+  (Δ ⊢ heap_ctx N) → nclose N ⊆ E →
   StripLaterEnvs Δ Δ' →
   envs_lookup i Δ' = Some (false, l ↦ v)%I →
   envs_simple_replace i false (Esnoc Enil i (l ↦ v')) Δ' = Some Δ'' →
-  Δ'' ⊢ Φ (LitV LitUnit) → Δ ⊢ WP Store (Lit (LitLoc l)) e @ E {{ Φ }}.
+  (Δ'' ⊢ Φ (LitV LitUnit)) → Δ ⊢ WP Store (Lit (LitLoc l)) e @ E {{ Φ }}.
 Proof.
   intros. rewrite -wp_store // -always_and_sep_l. apply and_intro; first done.
   rewrite strip_later_env_sound -later_sep envs_simple_replace_sound //; simpl.
@@ -59,10 +59,10 @@ Qed.
 
 Lemma tac_wp_cas_fail Δ Δ' N E i l q v e1 v1 e2 v2 Φ :
   to_val e1 = Some v1 → to_val e2 = Some v2 →
-  Δ ⊢ heap_ctx N → nclose N ⊆ E →
+  (Δ ⊢ heap_ctx N) → nclose N ⊆ E →
   StripLaterEnvs Δ Δ' →
   envs_lookup i Δ' = Some (false, l ↦{q} v)%I → v ≠ v1 →
-  Δ' ⊢ Φ (LitV (LitBool false)) →
+  (Δ' ⊢ Φ (LitV (LitBool false))) →
   Δ ⊢ WP CAS (Lit (LitLoc l)) e1 e2 @ E {{ Φ }}.
 Proof.
   intros. rewrite -wp_cas_fail // -always_and_sep_l. apply and_intro; first done.
@@ -72,11 +72,11 @@ Qed.
 
 Lemma tac_wp_cas_suc Δ Δ' Δ'' N E i l v e1 v1 e2 v2 Φ :
   to_val e1 = Some v1 → to_val e2 = Some v2 →
-  Δ ⊢ heap_ctx N → nclose N ⊆ E →
+  (Δ ⊢ heap_ctx N) → nclose N ⊆ E →
   StripLaterEnvs Δ Δ' →
   envs_lookup i Δ' = Some (false, l ↦ v)%I → v = v1 →
   envs_simple_replace i false (Esnoc Enil i (l ↦ v2)) Δ' = Some Δ'' →
-  Δ'' ⊢ Φ (LitV (LitBool true)) → Δ ⊢ WP CAS (Lit (LitLoc l)) e1 e2 @ E {{ Φ }}.
+  (Δ'' ⊢ Φ (LitV (LitBool true))) → Δ ⊢ WP CAS (Lit (LitLoc l)) e1 e2 @ E {{ Φ }}.
 Proof.
   intros; subst.
   rewrite -wp_cas_suc // -always_and_sep_l. apply and_intro; first done.

program_logic/adequacy.v

@@ -56,7 +56,7 @@ Proof.
     by rewrite -Permutation_middle /= big_op_app.
 Qed.
 Lemma wp_adequacy_steps P Φ k n e1 t2 σ1 σ2 r1 :
-  P ⊢ WP e1 {{ Φ }} →
+  (P ⊢ WP e1 {{ Φ }}) →
   nsteps step k ([e1],σ1) (t2,σ2) →
   1 < n → wsat (k + n) ⊤ σ1 r1 →
   P (k + n) r1 →
@@ -70,7 +70,7 @@ Qed.
 
 Lemma wp_adequacy_own Φ e1 t2 σ1 m σ2 :
   ✓ m →
-  (ownP σ1 ★ ownG m) ⊢ WP e1 {{ Φ }} →
+  (ownP σ1 ★ ownG m ⊢ WP e1 {{ Φ }}) →
   rtc step ([e1],σ1) (t2,σ2) →
   ∃ rs2 Φs', wptp 2 t2 (Φ :: Φs') rs2 ∧ wsat 2 ⊤ σ2 (big_op rs2).
 Proof.
@@ -85,7 +85,7 @@ Qed.
 
 Theorem wp_adequacy_result E φ e v t2 σ1 m σ2 :
   ✓ m →
-  (ownP σ1 ★ ownG m) ⊢ WP e @ E {{ v', ■ φ v' }} →
+  (ownP σ1 ★ ownG m ⊢ WP e @ E {{ v', ■ φ v' }}) →
   rtc step ([e], σ1) (of_val v :: t2, σ2) →
   φ v.
 Proof.
@@ -111,7 +111,7 @@ Qed.
 
 Lemma wp_adequacy_reducible E Φ e1 e2 t2 σ1 m σ2 :
   ✓ m →
-  (ownP σ1 ★ ownG m) ⊢ WP e1 @ E {{ Φ }} →
+  (ownP σ1 ★ ownG m ⊢ WP e1 @ E {{ Φ }}) →
   rtc step ([e1], σ1) (t2, σ2) →
   e2 ∈ t2 → (is_Some (to_val e2) ∨ reducible e2 σ2).
 Proof.
@@ -129,7 +129,7 @@ Qed.
 (* Connect this up to the threadpool-semantics. *)
 Theorem wp_adequacy_safe E Φ e1 t2 σ1 m σ2 :
   ✓ m →
-  (ownP σ1 ★ ownG m) ⊢ WP e1 @ E {{ Φ }} →
+  (ownP σ1 ★ ownG m ⊢ WP e1 @ E {{ Φ }}) →
   rtc step ([e1], σ1) (t2, σ2) →
   Forall (λ e, is_Some (to_val e)) t2 ∨ ∃ t3 σ3, step (t2, σ2) (t3, σ3).
 Proof.

program_logic/auth.v

@@ -75,7 +75,8 @@ Section auth.
     ✓ a → nclose N ⊆ E →
     ▷ φ a ={E}=> ∃ γ, auth_ctx γ N φ ∧ auth_own γ a.
   Proof.
-    iIntros {??} "Hφ". iPvs (auth_alloc_strong N E a ∅ with "Hφ") as {γ} "[_ ?]"; [done..|].
+    iIntros {??} "Hφ".
+    iPvs (auth_alloc_strong N E a ∅ with "Hφ") as {γ} "[_ ?]"; [done..|].
     by iExists γ.
   Qed.
 
@@ -86,7 +87,7 @@ Section auth.
 
   Lemma auth_fsa E N (Ψ : V → iPropG Λ Σ) γ a :
     fsaV → nclose N ⊆ E →
-    (auth_ctx γ N φ ★ ▷ auth_own γ a ★ ∀ a',
+    auth_ctx γ N φ ★ ▷ auth_own γ a ★ (∀ a',
       ■ ✓ (a ⋅ a') ★ ▷ φ (a ⋅ a') -★
       fsa (E ∖ nclose N) (λ x, ∃ L Lv (Hup : LocalUpdate Lv L),
         ■ (Lv a ∧ ✓ (L a ⋅ a')) ★ ▷ φ (L a ⋅ a') ★
@@ -111,11 +112,11 @@ Section auth.
 
   Lemma auth_fsa' L `{!LocalUpdate Lv L} E N (Ψ : V → iPropG Λ Σ) γ a :
     fsaV → nclose N ⊆ E →
-    (auth_ctx γ N φ ★ ▷ auth_own γ a ★ (∀ a',
+    auth_ctx γ N φ ★ ▷ auth_own γ a ★ (∀ a',
       ■ ✓ (a ⋅ a') ★ ▷ φ (a ⋅ a') -★
       fsa (E ∖ nclose N) (λ x,
         ■ (Lv a ∧ ✓ (L a ⋅ a')) ★ ▷ φ (L a ⋅ a') ★
-        (auth_own γ (L a) -★ Ψ x))))
+        (auth_own γ (L a) -★ Ψ x)))
     ⊢ fsa E Ψ.
   Proof.
     iIntros {??} "(#Ha & Hγf & HΨ)"; iApply (auth_fsa E N Ψ γ a); auto.

program_logic/boxes.v

@@ -61,7 +61,7 @@ Instance box_own_auth_timeless γ
 Proof. apply own_timeless, pair_timeless; apply _. Qed.
 
 Lemma box_own_auth_agree γ b1 b2 :
-  (box_own_auth γ (● Excl' b1) ★ box_own_auth γ (◯ Excl' b2)) ⊢ (b1 = b2).
+  box_own_auth γ (● Excl' b1) ★ box_own_auth γ (◯ Excl' b2) ⊢ b1 = b2.
 Proof.
   rewrite /box_own_prop -own_op own_valid prod_validI /= and_elim_l.
   iIntros "Hb".