1. 05 Jun, 2019 1 commit
  2. 03 Jun, 2019 1 commit
  3. 30 May, 2019 1 commit
  4. 24 May, 2019 1 commit
  5. 29 Apr, 2019 1 commit
  6. 25 Apr, 2019 1 commit
  7. 24 Jan, 2019 1 commit
  8. 29 Nov, 2018 1 commit
  9. 01 Nov, 2018 1 commit
  10. 04 Oct, 2018 1 commit
  11. 29 May, 2018 2 commits
  12. 23 May, 2018 1 commit
  13. 20 Feb, 2018 3 commits
  14. 29 Nov, 2017 3 commits
  15. 28 Nov, 2017 3 commits
  16. 27 Nov, 2017 2 commits
  17. 14 Nov, 2017 1 commit
  18. 11 Nov, 2017 1 commit
  19. 25 Oct, 2017 4 commits
  20. 10 Oct, 2017 2 commits
  21. 17 Sep, 2017 2 commits
  22. 08 Jun, 2017 1 commit
  23. 07 Apr, 2017 1 commit
  24. 24 Mar, 2017 1 commit
    • Robbert Krebbers's avatar
      Generic big operators that are no longer tied to CMRAs. · 6fbff46e
      Robbert Krebbers authored
      Instead, I have introduced a type class `Monoid` that is used by the big operators:
      
          Class Monoid {M : ofeT} (o : M → M → M) := {
            monoid_unit : M;
            monoid_ne : NonExpansive2 o;
            monoid_assoc : Assoc (≡) o;
            monoid_comm : Comm (≡) o;
            monoid_left_id : LeftId (≡) monoid_unit o;
            monoid_right_id : RightId (≡) monoid_unit o;
          }.
      
      Note that the operation is an argument because we want to have multiple monoids over
      the same type (for example, on `uPred`s we have monoids for `∗`, `∧`, and `∨`). However,
      we do bundle the unit because:
      
      - If we would not, the unit would appear explicitly in an implicit argument of the
        big operators, which confuses rewrite. By bundling the unit in the `Monoid` class
        it is hidden, and hence rewrite won't even see it.
      - The unit is unique.
      
      We could in principle have big ops over setoids instead of OFEs. However, since we do
      not have a canonical structure for bundled setoids, I did not go that way.
      6fbff46e
  25. 11 Mar, 2017 1 commit
  26. 10 Mar, 2017 1 commit
  27. 11 Feb, 2017 1 commit