Skip to content
Snippets Groups Projects
Commit c568ece0 authored by Ralf Jung's avatar Ralf Jung
Browse files

Apply 2 suggestion(s) to 1 file(s)

parent b85bebc3
No related branches found
No related tags found
No related merge requests found
...@@ -7,7 +7,7 @@ This is not a general introduction to Iris: instead, we discuss the different ...@@ -7,7 +7,7 @@ This is not a general introduction to Iris: instead, we discuss the different
Iris equalities and the interface to their Coq implementation. In particular, we Iris equalities and the interface to their Coq implementation. In particular, we
discuss: discuss:
- Equality ("=") in the *on-paper* Iris metatheory - Equality ("=") in the *on-paper* Iris metatheory
- Coq equality (`=`) and setoid equivalence (`≡`); - Coq's Leibniz equality (`=`) and std++'s setoid equivalence (`≡`);
- N-equivalence on OFEs (`≡{n}≡`); - N-equivalence on OFEs (`≡{n}≡`);
- Iris internal equality (`≡` in `bi_scope`); - Iris internal equality (`≡` in `bi_scope`);
- Iris entailment and bi-entailment (`⊢`, `⊣⊢`). - Iris entailment and bi-entailment (`⊢`, `⊣⊢`).
...@@ -122,7 +122,7 @@ a Coq-level statement of type `Prop`, the latter an Iris-level statement of type ...@@ -122,7 +122,7 @@ a Coq-level statement of type `Prop`, the latter an Iris-level statement of type
`iProp`. However, the two are closely related: `P ⊢ Q` is equivalent to `emp ⊢ `iProp`. However, the two are closely related: `P ⊢ Q` is equivalent to `emp ⊢
P -∗ Q` (per Iris lemmas `entails_wand` and `wand_entails`). Iris also defines P -∗ Q` (per Iris lemmas `entails_wand` and `wand_entails`). Iris also defines
a "unary" form of entailment, `⊢ P`, which is short for `emp ⊢ P`. a "unary" form of entailment, `⊢ P`, which is short for `emp ⊢ P`.
We can also use bi-entailment `P ⊣⊢ Q` to express that both `P ⊢ Q` and `Q ⊢ P` gold. We can also use bi-entailment `P ⊣⊢ Q` to express that both `P ⊢ Q` and `Q ⊢ P` hold.
On paper, uniform predicates are defined by quotienting by an equivalence On paper, uniform predicates are defined by quotienting by an equivalence
relation ([Iris appendix, Sec. 3.3]); in Coq, that relation is chosen as the relation ([Iris appendix, Sec. 3.3]); in Coq, that relation is chosen as the
......
0% Loading or .
You are about to add 0 people to the discussion. Proceed with caution.
Finish editing this message first!
Please register or to comment