Skip to content
GitLab
Projects
Groups
Snippets
Help
Loading...
Help
Help
Support
Community forum
Keyboard shortcuts
?
Submit feedback
Contribute to GitLab
Sign in / Register
Toggle navigation
I
Iris
Project overview
Project overview
Details
Activity
Releases
Repository
Repository
Files
Commits
Branches
Tags
Contributors
Graph
Compare
Issues
0
Issues
0
List
Boards
Labels
Service Desk
Milestones
Merge Requests
0
Merge Requests
0
CI / CD
CI / CD
Pipelines
Jobs
Schedules
Operations
Operations
Incidents
Environments
Analytics
Analytics
CI / CD
Repository
Value Stream
Wiki
Wiki
Snippets
Snippets
Members
Members
Collapse sidebar
Close sidebar
Activity
Graph
Create a new issue
Jobs
Commits
Issue Boards
Open sidebar
Rodolphe Lepigre
Iris
Commits
00a054f1
Commit
00a054f1
authored
Feb 25, 2016
by
Robbert Krebbers
Browse files
Options
Browse Files
Download
Email Patches
Plain Diff
Simplify f_equiv a bit.
parent
8a1a8f00
Changes
1
Hide whitespace changes
Inline
Sidebyside
Showing
1 changed file
with
5 additions
and
17 deletions
+5
17
prelude/tactics.v
prelude/tactics.v
+5
17
No files found.
prelude/tactics.v
View file @
00a054f1
...
...
@@ 233,7 +233,7 @@ Ltac setoid_subst :=
If it cannot solve an equality, it will leave that to the user. *)
Ltac
f_equiv
:
=
(* Deal with "pointwise_relation" *)
try
lazymatch
goal
with
repeat
lazymatch
goal
with


pointwise_relation
_
_
_
_
=>
intros
?
end
;
(* Normalize away equalities. *)
...
...
@@ 249,13 +249,9 @@ Ltac f_equiv :=
destruct
x
;
f_equiv
(* First assume that the arguments need the same relation as the result *)


?R
(
?f
?x
)
(
?f
_
)
=>
let
H
:
=
fresh
"Proper"
in
assert
(
Proper
(
R
==>
R
)
f
)
as
H
by
(
eapply
_
)
;
apply
H
;
clear
H
;
f_equiv
apply
(
_
:
Proper
(
R
==>
R
)
f
)
;
f_equiv


?R
(
?f
?x
?y
)
(
?f
_
_
)
=>
let
H
:
=
fresh
"Proper"
in
assert
(
Proper
(
R
==>
R
==>
R
)
f
)
as
H
by
(
eapply
_
)
;
apply
H
;
clear
H
;
f_equiv
apply
(
_
:
Proper
(
R
==>
R
==>
R
)
f
)
;
f_equiv
(* Next, try to infer the relation. Unfortunately, there is an instance
of Proper for (eq ==> _), which will always be matched. *)
(* TODO: Can we exclude that instance? *)
...
...
@@ 263,17 +259,9 @@ Ltac f_equiv :=
query for "pointwise_relation"'s. But that leads to a combinatorial
explosion about which arguments are and which are not the same. *)


?R
(
?f
?x
)
(
?f
_
)
=>
let
R1
:
=
fresh
"R"
in
let
H
:
=
fresh
"HProp"
in
let
T
:
=
type
of
x
in
evar
(
R1
:
relation
T
)
;
assert
(
Proper
(
R1
==>
R
)
f
)
as
H
by
(
subst
R1
;
eapply
_
)
;
subst
R1
;
apply
H
;
clear
H
;
f_equiv
apply
(
_
:
Proper
(
_
==>
R
)
f
)
;
f_equiv


?R
(
?f
?x
?y
)
(
?f
_
_
)
=>
let
R1
:
=
fresh
"R"
in
let
R2
:
=
fresh
"R"
in
let
H
:
=
fresh
"HProp"
in
let
T1
:
=
type
of
x
in
evar
(
R1
:
relation
T1
)
;
let
T2
:
=
type
of
y
in
evar
(
R2
:
relation
T2
)
;
assert
(
Proper
(
R1
==>
R2
==>
R
)
f
)
as
H
by
(
subst
R1
R2
;
eapply
_
)
;
subst
R1
R2
;
apply
H
;
clear
H
;
f_equiv
apply
(
_
:
Proper
(
_
==>
_
==>
R
)
f
)
;
f_equiv
(* In case the function symbol differs, but the arguments are the same,
maybe we have a pointwise_relation in our context. *)

H
:
pointwise_relation
_
?R
?f
?g

?R
(
?f
?x
)
(
?g
?x
)
=>
...
...
Write
Preview
Markdown
is supported
0%
Try again
or
attach a new file
.
Attach a file
Cancel
You are about to add
0
people
to the discussion. Proceed with caution.
Finish editing this message first!
Cancel
Please
register
or
sign in
to comment