Since env_cbv does not unfold these apps, we should do it ourselves,
to avoid ending up with partially evaluated terms.

Add triple notation for generalized post-condition

This changeset defines notation for the Iris style of writing Hoare triples:

`{{{ P }}} e {{{ v1 .. vn; T, Q }}} := P ★ (∀ v1 .. vn, Q → Φ T) ⊢ WP e {{ Φ }}`

For no good reason the notation is parsing only, although I do not declare it as such. We might want to do that though, since it might be too hard to understand a Hoare triple goal without unfolding it.

I have changed the barrier specifications to use the new notation in an attempt to demonstrate their usefulness (or, at a minimum, their applicability). The changes are rather minimal, as you can see.

## Changes

First and foremost, the specifications change. (Duh!)
Then, there are three kinds of changes to the proofs:
1. The first `iIntros` needs to take care of introducing `Φ`. No big deal, in my opinion.
2. Introducing the spatial assumptions needs one additional level of structure since we go from

    ```P1 ★ P2 ★ (∀ v, Q v -★ Φ v)```
to
   ```(P1 ★ P2) ★ (∀ v, Q v -★ Φ v)```

3. A post-condition of `True` leads to the rather annoying hypothesis `True -★ Φ v`, which (as far as I can tell) cannot be made to behave the same as just (Φ v) in the context of `iFrame`.

## Applicability

I have also looked at most other examples of specifications in heap_lang/lib.  The notation seems to be applicable to almost all of them. The only place where I spotted an obvious mismatch is par.v, where the current lemmas have a later before the generalized post-condition, as in `... ★ (∀ .., ... -★ ▷ Φ ..) ⊢ WP ..`. We could always add another pair of notations for this special case, I suppose.

## Nomenclature
I think "Texan triple" would be a good name, seeing how everything is bigger in Texas, including the number of curly braces.

See merge request !9

This fixes issue 39.

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.

And also rename the corresponding proof mode tactics.

docs: make the borders slightly larger

This makes it so that lines of text don't become so ridiculously long and are easier to read.

What do you think @robbertkrebbers @jjourdan ?

See merge request !17

docs: make the borders slightly larger, so that lines of text dont become so ridicolously long and are easier to read