 12 Feb, 2018 2 commits


JacquesHenri Jourdan authored
This reverts commit 78ba9509.

JacquesHenri Jourdan authored

 07 Feb, 2018 1 commit


Robbert Krebbers authored
This commit implements a generic `iAlways` tactic that is not tied to `persistently`, `affinely` and `plainly` but can be instantiated with a variety of alwaysstyle modalities. In order to plug in an alwaysstyle modality, one has to decide for both the persistent and spatial what action should be performed upon introducing the modality:  Introduction is only allowed when the context is empty.  Introduction is only allowed when all hypotheses satisfy some predicate `C : PROP → Prop` (where `C` should be a type class).  Introduction will only keep the hypotheses that satisfy some predicate `C : PROP → Prop` (where `C` should be a type class).  Introduction will clear the context.  Introduction will keep the context asif. Formally, these actions correspond to the following inductive type: ```coq Inductive always_intro_spec (PROP : bi) :=  AIEnvIsEmpty  AIEnvForall (C : PROP → Prop)  AIEnvFilter (C : PROP → Prop)  AIEnvClear  AIEnvId. ``` An alwaysstyle modality is then a record `always_modality` packing together the modality with the laws it should satisfy to justify the given actions for both contexts.

 02 Feb, 2018 1 commit


JacquesHenri Jourdan authored

 27 Jan, 2018 1 commit


JacquesHenri Jourdan authored

 25 Jan, 2018 2 commits


JacquesHenri Jourdan authored

JacquesHenri Jourdan authored

 24 Jan, 2018 1 commit


JacquesHenri Jourdan authored

 23 Jan, 2018 1 commit


JacquesHenri Jourdan authored

 21 Jan, 2018 1 commit


Robbert Krebbers authored
This should fix irisexamples.

 20 Jan, 2018 1 commit


Robbert Krebbers authored

 18 Jan, 2018 1 commit


JacquesHenri Jourdan authored

 16 Jan, 2018 4 commits


JacquesHenri Jourdan authored

JacquesHenri Jourdan authored

Robbert Krebbers authored
This used to be done by using `ElimModal` in backwards direction. Having a separate type class for this gets rid of some hacks:  Both `Hint Mode`s in forward and backwards direction for `ElimModal`.  Weird type class precedence hacks to make sure the right instance is picked. These were needed because using `ElimModal` in backwards direction caused ambiguity.

Robbert Krebbers authored

 30 Dec, 2017 1 commit


Robbert Krebbers authored
This was an oversight in !63.

 22 Dec, 2017 3 commits


JacquesHenri Jourdan authored

JacquesHenri Jourdan authored

JacquesHenri Jourdan authored

 20 Dec, 2017 1 commit


Robbert Krebbers authored

 04 Dec, 2017 3 commits


JacquesHenri Jourdan authored

JacquesHenri Jourdan authored

JacquesHenri Jourdan authored

 03 Dec, 2017 1 commit


Robbert Krebbers authored
We do not have a notation for `bi_affinely` either, so this is at least consistent.

 03 Nov, 2017 2 commits


JacquesHenri Jourdan authored

Robbert Krebbers authored

 01 Nov, 2017 2 commits


JacquesHenri Jourdan authored

JacquesHenri Jourdan authored
(□ P) now means (bi_bare (bi_persistently P)). This is motivated by the fact that these two modalities are rarely used separately. In the case of an affine BI, we keep the □ notation. This means that a bi_bare is inserted each time we use □. Hence, a few adaptations need to be done in the proof mode class instances.

 30 Oct, 2017 11 commits


Robbert Krebbers authored
Whenever we iSpecialize something whose conclusion is persistent, we now have to prove all the premises under the sink modality. This is strictly more powerful, as we now have to use just some of the hypotheses to prove the premises, instead of all.

Robbert Krebbers authored

Robbert Krebbers authored

Robbert Krebbers authored

Robbert Krebbers authored

Robbert Krebbers authored
This also applies to the introduction pattern `!#`. Both will now introduce as many ■ or □ as possible. This behavior is consistent with the dual, `#`, which also gets rid of as many ■ and □ modalities as possible.

Robbert Krebbers authored

Robbert Krebbers authored
(All the later lemmas are now prefixed by later_, and dito for laterN, and except_0).

Robbert Krebbers authored

Robbert Krebbers authored

Robbert Krebbers authored
The absence of this axiom has two consequences:  We no longer have `■ (P ∗ Q) ⊢ ■ P ∗ ■ Q` and `□ (P ∗ Q) ⊢ □ P ∗ □ Q`, and as a result, separating conjunctions in the unrestricted/persistent context cannot be eliminated.  When having `(P ∗ ⬕ Q) ∗ P`, we do not get `⬕ Q ∗ P`. In the proof mode this means when having: H1 : P ∗ ⬕ Q H2 : P We cannot say `iDestruct ("H1" with "H2") as "#H1"` and keep `H2`. However, there is now a type class `PositiveBI PROP`, and when there is an instance of this type class, one gets the above reasoning principle back. TODO: Can we describe positivity of individual propositions instead of the whole BI? That way, we would get the above reasoning principles even when the BI is not positive, but the propositions involved are.
