Skip to content
Snippets Groups Projects
Commit 408e172d authored by Lennard Gäher's avatar Lennard Gäher
Browse files

naming in changelog

parent d967a7c4
No related tags found
No related merge requests found
...@@ -60,10 +60,10 @@ lemma. ...@@ -60,10 +60,10 @@ lemma.
To retain backwards compatibility with the interaction laws of fancy updates To retain backwards compatibility with the interaction laws of fancy updates
with the plainly modality (`BiFUpdPlainly`), which are incompatible with with the plainly modality (`BiFUpdPlainly`), which are incompatible with
later credits, the logic is parameterized by two typeclasses, `HasLc` later credits, the logic is parameterized by two typeclasses, `HasLc`
and `HasNoLc` that allow opting for either later credits or `BiFUpdPlainly`. and `HasNoLc`, that allow opting for either later credits or `BiFUpdPlainly`.
The soundness lemmas for the fancy update modality are available in two versions, The soundness lemmas for the fancy update modality are available in two versions,
with later credits (suffix `_lc`) and without later credits (suffix `_no_lc`). with later credits (suffix `_lc`) and without later credits (suffix `_no_lc`).
The lemma `step_fupdN_soundness` is now generic over this choice. The lemma `step_fupdN_soundness_gen` is generic over this choice.
**Changes in `program_logic`:** **Changes in `program_logic`:**
...@@ -78,9 +78,9 @@ lemma. ...@@ -78,9 +78,9 @@ lemma.
and one without support for later credits, providing `HasNoLc` (suffix `_no_lc`). and one without support for later credits, providing `HasNoLc` (suffix `_no_lc`).
Clients of the adequacy proof will need to opt for either of these and introduce Clients of the adequacy proof will need to opt for either of these and introduce
the additional assumptions. the additional assumptions.
+ The parameter for the stuckness bit `s` in `wp_strong_adequacy` has moved up and + The parameter for the stuckness bit `s` in `wp_strong_adequacy{_lc, _no_lc}` has
is now universally quantified in the lemma instead of being existentially quantified moved up and is now universally quantified in the lemma instead of being existentially
at the Iris-level. For clients that already previously quantified over `s` quantified at the Iris-level. For clients that already previously quantified over `s`
at the Coq level, the only required change should be to remove the instantiation at the Coq level, the only required change should be to remove the instantiation
of the existential quantifier. of the existential quantifier.
......
0% Loading or .
You are about to add 0 people to the discussion. Proceed with caution.
Please register or to comment