 24 Jun, 2019 4 commits
 18 Jun, 2019 3 commits
 17 Jun, 2019 1 commit


Paolo G. Giarrusso authored

 14 Jun, 2019 1 commit


Ralf Jung authored

 10 Jun, 2019 1 commit


Robbert Krebbers authored

 31 May, 2019 1 commit


Amin Timany authored

 14 Mar, 2019 1 commit


Robbert Krebbers authored

 05 Mar, 2019 1 commit


Ralf Jung authored

 01 Mar, 2019 1 commit


Robbert Krebbers authored

 24 Jan, 2019 4 commits
 27 Nov, 2018 3 commits


Robbert Krebbers authored

Robbert Krebbers authored

Robbert Krebbers authored
This closes issue #220.

 31 Oct, 2018 1 commit


JacquesHenri Jourdan authored

 29 Oct, 2018 2 commits


JacquesHenri Jourdan authored

JacquesHenri Jourdan authored
We add a specific constructor to the type of expressions for injecting values in expressions. The advantage are :  Values can be assumed to be always closed when performing substitutions (even though they could contain free variables, but it turns out it does not cause any problem in the proofs in practice). This means that we no longer need the `Closed` typeclass and everything that comes with it (all the reflectionbased machinery contained in tactics.v is no longer necessary). I have not measured anything, but I guess this would have a significant performance impact.  There is only one constructor for values. As a result, the AsVal and IntoVal typeclasses are no longer necessary: an expression which is a value will always unify with `Val _`, and therefore lemmas can be stated using this constructor. Of course, this means that there are two ways of writing such a thing as "The pair of integers 1 and 2": Either by using the value constructor applied to the pair represented as a value, or by using the expression pair constructor. So we add reduction rules that transform reduced pair, injection and closure expressions into values. At first, this seems weird, because of the redundancy. But in fact, this has some meaning, since the machine migth actually be doing something to e.g., allocate the pair or the closure. These additional steps of computation show up in the proofs, and some additional wp_* tactics need to be called.

 05 Oct, 2018 3 commits


Robbert Krebbers authored

Ralf Jung authored

Marianna Rapoport authored
 Removing head of list of observations after each reduction step in definition of wp  Adding support for observations to state_interp and world  Applying Ralf's suggestions to previous commit (e.g. replacing /\ and > with unicode characters)

 05 Jul, 2018 1 commit


Ralf Jung authored

 04 Jul, 2018 2 commits
 03 Jul, 2018 1 commit


Ralf Jung authored
With a pretty proof by Robbert

 02 Jul, 2018 1 commit


Ralf Jung authored

 30 Jun, 2018 1 commit


Ralf Jung authored

 29 Jun, 2018 1 commit


Ralf Jung authored

 28 Jun, 2018 1 commit


Ralf Jung authored
This restricts CAS to only be able to compare literals with literals, NONEV with NONEV and NONEV with SOMEV for a literal.

 15 Jun, 2018 1 commit


Ralf Jung authored
* move PROPenvs definitions to environments.v so that we can control them without pulling in coq_tactics * use reductioncontrolled `pm_default` for proofmode accessors

 13 Jun, 2018 1 commit


Ralf Jung authored

 08 Jun, 2018 1 commit


Ralf Jung authored

 20 Apr, 2018 1 commit


Robbert Krebbers authored
Also, remove the inconsistency that `wp_expr_eval` succeeds on a goal that is not a WP.

 19 Mar, 2018 1 commit


Robbert Krebbers authored
