@@ -4,7 +4,8 @@ From exercises Require Export fundamental.

(** * Semantic and syntactic type safety *)

(** We prove *semantic type safety*, which says that any _closed_ expression

that is semantically typed is safe, i.e., it does not crash. Based on this

theorem we then prove *syntactic type safety* as a corollary, i.e., any _closed_ syntactically well-typed program is safe. Semantic type safety is a consequence

theorem we then prove *syntactic type safety* as a corollary, i.e., any _closed_

syntactically well-typed program is safe. Semantic type safety is a consequence

of Iris's adequacy theorem, and syntactic type safety is a consequence of the

fundamental theorem together and semantic type safety. *)

...

...

@@ -32,7 +33,8 @@ Proof.

Qed.

(** The actual theorem for semantic type safety lemma states that semantically

typed closed programs do not get stuck. It is a simple consequence of the lemma [sem_gen_type_safety] above. *)

typed closed programs do not get stuck. It is a simple consequence of the lemma

@@ -4,7 +4,8 @@ From solutions Require Export fundamental.

(** * Semantic and syntactic type safety *)

(** We prove *semantic type safety*, which says that any _closed_ expression

that is semantically typed is safe, i.e., it does not crash. Based on this

theorem we then prove *syntactic type safety* as a corollary, i.e., any _closed_ syntactically well-typed program is safe. Semantic type safety is a consequence

theorem we then prove *syntactic type safety* as a corollary, i.e., any _closed_

syntactically well-typed program is safe. Semantic type safety is a consequence

of Iris's adequacy theorem, and syntactic type safety is a consequence of the

fundamental theorem together and semantic type safety. *)

...

...

@@ -32,7 +33,8 @@ Proof.

Qed.

(** The actual theorem for semantic type safety lemma states that semantically

typed closed programs do not get stuck. It is a simple consequence of the lemma [sem_gen_type_safety] above. *)

typed closed programs do not get stuck. It is a simple consequence of the lemma