 31 Oct, 2018 1 commit


JacquesHenri Jourdan authored

 29 Oct, 2018 2 commits


JacquesHenri Jourdan authored

JacquesHenri Jourdan authored
We add a specific constructor to the type of expressions for injecting values in expressions. The advantage are :  Values can be assumed to be always closed when performing substitutions (even though they could contain free variables, but it turns out it does not cause any problem in the proofs in practice). This means that we no longer need the `Closed` typeclass and everything that comes with it (all the reflectionbased machinery contained in tactics.v is no longer necessary). I have not measured anything, but I guess this would have a significant performance impact.  There is only one constructor for values. As a result, the AsVal and IntoVal typeclasses are no longer necessary: an expression which is a value will always unify with `Val _`, and therefore lemmas can be stated using this constructor. Of course, this means that there are two ways of writing such a thing as "The pair of integers 1 and 2": Either by using the value constructor applied to the pair represented as a value, or by using the expression pair constructor. So we add reduction rules that transform reduced pair, injection and closure expressions into values. At first, this seems weird, because of the redundancy. But in fact, this has some meaning, since the machine migth actually be doing something to e.g., allocate the pair or the closure. These additional steps of computation show up in the proofs, and some additional wp_* tactics need to be called.

 04 Oct, 2018 1 commit


Ralf Jung authored

 18 Jun, 2018 1 commit


Ralf Jung authored

 02 May, 2018 1 commit


Ralf Jung authored

 25 Apr, 2018 1 commit


Ralf Jung authored

 04 Dec, 2017 1 commit


Robbert Krebbers authored

 25 Oct, 2017 1 commit


Robbert Krebbers authored
The advantage is that we can directly use a Coq introduction pattern `cpat` to perform actions to the pure assertion. Before, this had to be done in several steps: iDestruct ... as "[Htmp ...]"; iDestruct "Htmp" as %cpat. That is, one had to introduce a temporary name. I expect this to be quite useful in various developments as many of e.g. our invariants are written as: ∃ x1 .. x2, ⌜ pure stuff ⌝ ∗ spacial stuff.

 25 Sep, 2017 1 commit


Robbert Krebbers authored

 09 Jan, 2017 1 commit


Ralf Jung authored

 06 Jan, 2017 1 commit


Ralf Jung authored

 05 Jan, 2017 1 commit


Ralf Jung authored

 03 Jan, 2017 2 commits
 09 Dec, 2016 3 commits


Ralf Jung authored

Robbert Krebbers authored

Robbert Krebbers authored
The WP construction now takes an invariant on states as a parameter (part of the irisG class) and no longer builds in the authoritative ownership of the entire state. When instantiating WP with a concrete language on can choose its state invariant. For example, for heap_lang we directly use `auth (gmap loc (frac * dec_agree val))`, and avoid the indirection through invariants entirely. As a result, we no longer have to carry `heap_ctx` around.

 08 Dec, 2016 1 commit


Ralf Jung authored

 07 Dec, 2016 1 commit

 06 Dec, 2016 2 commits
 22 Nov, 2016 1 commit


Ralf Jung authored

 09 Nov, 2016 1 commit


Robbert Krebbers authored

 03 Nov, 2016 1 commit


Robbert Krebbers authored
The old choice for ★ was a arbitrary: the precedence of the ASCII asterisk * was fixed at a wrong level in Coq, so we had to pick another symbol. The ★ was a random choice from a unicode chart. The new symbol ∗ (as proposed by David Swasey) corresponds better to conventional practise and matches the symbol we use on paper.

 01 Nov, 2016 3 commits
 27 Oct, 2016 3 commits


Robbert Krebbers authored

Ralf Jung authored

Ralf Jung authored

 25 Oct, 2016 2 commits


Robbert Krebbers authored
There are now two proof mode tactics for dealing with modalities:  `iModIntro` : introduction of a modality  `iMod pm_trm as (x1 ... xn) "ipat"` : eliminate a modality The behavior of these tactics can be controlled by instances of the `IntroModal` and `ElimModal` type class. We have declared instances for later, except 0, basic updates and fancy updates. The tactic `iMod` is flexible enough that it can also eliminate an updates around a weakest pre, and so forth. The corresponding introduction patterns of these tactics are `!>` and `>`. These tactics replace the tactics `iUpdIntro`, `iUpd` and `iTimeless`. Source of backwards incompatability: the introduction pattern `!>` is used for introduction of arbitrary modalities. It used to introduce laters by stripping of a later of each hypotheses.

Robbert Krebbers authored
And also rename the corresponding proof mode tactics.

 05 Oct, 2016 1 commit


Robbert Krebbers authored

 25 Aug, 2016 3 commits


Ralf Jung authored

Robbert Krebbers authored
NB: these scopes delimiters were already there before Janno's a0067662.

Janno authored

 09 Aug, 2016 1 commit


Ralf Jung authored

 08 Aug, 2016 1 commit


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].

 05 Aug, 2016 1 commit


Robbert Krebbers authored
This better reflects the name of the bind rule. I renamed an internal tactic that was previously called wp_bind into wp_bind_core.
