1. 20 Feb, 2018 3 commits
  2. 07 Feb, 2018 3 commits
  3. 02 Feb, 2018 1 commit
  4. 23 Jan, 2018 1 commit
  5. 20 Jan, 2018 1 commit
  6. 13 Jan, 2018 1 commit
  7. 20 Dec, 2017 1 commit
  8. 07 Dec, 2017 1 commit
  9. 05 Dec, 2017 2 commits
  10. 30 Nov, 2017 2 commits
  11. 13 Nov, 2017 1 commit
  12. 11 Nov, 2017 1 commit
  13. 09 Nov, 2017 4 commits
  14. 08 Nov, 2017 3 commits
  15. 04 Nov, 2017 1 commit
  16. 01 Nov, 2017 1 commit
    • Robbert Krebbers's avatar
      Hide the proof mode entailment behind a definition. · 8574d1ea
      Robbert Krebbers authored
      This solves issue #100: the proof mode notation is sometimes not printed. As
      Ralf discovered, the problem is that there are two overlapping notations:
      
      ```coq
      Notation "P ⊢ Q" := (uPred_entails P Q).
      ```
      
      And the "proof mode" notation:
      
      ```
      Notation "Γ '--------------------------------------' □ Δ '--------------------------------------' ∗ Q" :=
        (of_envs (Envs Γ Δ) ⊢ Q%I).
      ```
      
      These two notations overlap, so, when having a "proof mode" goal of the shape
      `of_envs (Envs Γ Δ) ⊢ Q%I`, how do we know which notation is Coq going to pick
      for pretty printing this goal? As we have seen, this choice depends on the
      import order (since both notations appear in different files), and as such, Coq
      sometimes (unintendedly) uses the first notation instead of the latter.
      
      The idea of this commit is to wrap `of_envs (Envs Γ Δ) ⊢ Q%I` into a definition
      so that there is no ambiguity for the pretty printer anymore.
      8574d1ea
  17. 30 Oct, 2017 1 commit
  18. 28 Oct, 2017 3 commits
  19. 27 Oct, 2017 1 commit
  20. 25 Oct, 2017 6 commits
  21. 19 Oct, 2017 2 commits