tactics.v 13.1 KB
Newer Older
1
(* Copyright (c) 2012-2013, Robbert Krebbers. *)
2
(* This file is distributed under the terms of the BSD license. *)
3
(** This file collects general purpose tactics that are used throughout
4
the development. *)
5
Require Export Psatz.
6 7
Require Export base.

8 9 10 11 12
(** We declare hint databases [f_equal], [congruence] and [lia] and containing
solely the tactic corresponding to its name. These hint database are useful in
to be combined in combination with other hint database. *)
Hint Extern 998 (_ = _) => f_equal : f_equal.
Hint Extern 999 => congruence : congruence.
13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20
Hint Extern 1000 => lia : lia.

(** The tactic [intuition] expands to [intuition auto with *] by default. This
is rather efficient when having big hint databases, or expensive [Hint Extern]
declarations as the above. *)
Tactic Notation "intuition" := intuition auto.

(** A slightly modified version of Ssreflect's finishing tactic [done]. It
21 22 23 24
also performs [reflexivity] and uses symmetry of negated equalities. Compared
to Ssreflect's [done], it does not compute the goal's [hnf] so as to avoid
unfolding setoid equalities. Note that this tactic performs much better than
Coq's [easy] tactic as it does not perform [inversion]. *)
25 26
Ltac done :=
  trivial; intros; solve
27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35
  [ repeat first
    [ solve [trivial]
    | solve [symmetry; trivial]
    | reflexivity
    | discriminate
    | contradiction
    | solve [apply not_symmetry; trivial]
    | split ]
  | match goal with H : ¬_ |- _ => solve [destruct H; trivial] end ].
36 37 38
Tactic Notation "by" tactic(tac) :=
  tac; done.

39 40
(** Whereas the [split] tactic splits any inductive with one constructor, the
tactic [split_and] only splits a conjunction. *)
41
Ltac split_and := match goal with |- _  _ => split end.
42 43 44 45 46
Ltac split_ands := repeat split_and.

(** The tactic [case_match] destructs an arbitrary match in the conclusion or
assumptions, and generates a corresponding equality. This tactic is best used
together with the [repeat] tactical. *)
47 48 49 50 51 52
Ltac case_match :=
  match goal with
  | H : context [ match ?x with _ => _ end ] |- _ => destruct x eqn:?
  | |- context [ match ?x with _ => _ end ] => destruct x eqn:?
  end.

53 54 55 56
(** The tactic [unless T by tac_fail] succeeds if [T] is not provable by
the tactic [tac_fail]. *)
Tactic Notation "unless" constr(T) "by" tactic3(tac_fail) :=
  first [assert T by tac_fail; fail 1 | idtac].
57 58 59 60 61 62

(** The tactic [repeat_on_hyps tac] repeatedly applies [tac] in unspecified
order on all hypotheses until it cannot be applied to any hypothesis anymore. *)
Tactic Notation "repeat_on_hyps" tactic3(tac) :=
  repeat match goal with H : _ |- _ => progress tac H end.

63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86
(** The tactic [clear dependent H1 ... Hn] clears the hypotheses [Hi] and
their dependencies. *)
Tactic Notation "clear" "dependent" hyp(H1) hyp(H2) :=
  clear dependent H1; clear dependent H2.
Tactic Notation "clear" "dependent" hyp(H1) hyp(H2) hyp(H3) :=
  clear dependent H1 H2; clear dependent H3.
Tactic Notation "clear" "dependent" hyp(H1) hyp(H2) hyp(H3) hyp(H4) :=
  clear dependent H1 H2 H3; clear dependent H4.
Tactic Notation "clear" "dependent" hyp(H1) hyp(H2) hyp(H3) hyp(H4)
  hyp(H5) := clear dependent H1 H2 H3 H4; clear dependent H5.
Tactic Notation "clear" "dependent" hyp(H1) hyp(H2) hyp(H3) hyp(H4) hyp(H5)
  hyp (H6) := clear dependent H1 H2 H3 H4 H5; clear dependent H6.
Tactic Notation "clear" "dependent" hyp(H1) hyp(H2) hyp(H3) hyp(H4) hyp(H5)
  hyp (H6) hyp(H7) := clear dependent H1 H2 H3 H4 H5 H6; clear dependent H7.
Tactic Notation "clear" "dependent" hyp(H1) hyp(H2) hyp(H3) hyp(H4) hyp(H5)
  hyp (H6) hyp(H7) hyp(H8) :=
  clear dependent H1 H2 H3 H4 H5 H6 H7; clear dependent H8.
Tactic Notation "clear" "dependent" hyp(H1) hyp(H2) hyp(H3) hyp(H4) hyp(H5)
  hyp (H6) hyp(H7) hyp(H8) hyp(H9) :=
  clear dependent H1 H2 H3 H4 H5 H6 H7 H8; clear dependent H9.
Tactic Notation "clear" "dependent" hyp(H1) hyp(H2) hyp(H3) hyp(H4) hyp(H5)
  hyp (H6) hyp(H7) hyp(H8) hyp(H9) hyp(H10) :=
  clear dependent H1 H2 H3 H4 H5 H6 H7 H8 H9; clear dependent H10.

87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119
(** The tactic [first_of t ft ot] calls [t] and then calls [ft] on the first
subgoal generated by [t], and [ot] on the other subgoals. *)
Ltac first_of t ft ot :=
     solve [t]
  || (t; [ ft ])
  || (t; [ ft | ot ])
  || (t; [ ft | ot | ot ])
  || (t; [ ft | ot | ot | ot ])
  || (t; [ ft | ot | ot | ot | ot ])
  || (t; [ ft | ot | ot | ot | ot | ot ])
  || (t; [ ft | ot | ot | ot | ot | ot | ot ])
  || (t; [ ft | ot | ot | ot | ot | ot | ot | ot ])
  || (t; [ ft | ot | ot | ot | ot | ot | ot | ot | ot ])
  || (t; [ ft | ot | ot | ot | ot | ot | ot | ot | ot | ot ])
  || (t; [ ft | ot | ot | ot | ot | ot | ot | ot | ot | ot | ot ])
  || (t; [ ft | ot | ot | ot | ot | ot | ot | ot | ot | ot | ot | ot ])
  || (t; [ ft | ot | ot | ot | ot | ot | ot | ot | ot | ot | ot | ot | ot ]).

Ltac last_of t ot lt :=
     solve [t]
  || (t; [ lt ])
  || (t; [ ot | lt ])
  || (t; [ ot | ot | lt ])
  || (t; [ ot | ot | ot | lt ])
  || (t; [ ot | ot | ot | ot | lt ])
  || (t; [ ot | ot | ot | ot | ot | lt ])
  || (t; [ ot | ot | ot | ot | ot | ot | lt ])
  || (t; [ ot | ot | ot | ot | ot | ot | ot | lt ])
  || (t; [ ot | ot | ot | ot | ot | ot | ot | ot | lt ])
  || (t; [ ot | ot | ot | ot | ot | ot | ot | ot | ot | lt ])
  || (t; [ ot | ot | ot | ot | ot | ot | ot | ot | ot | ot | lt ])
  || (t; [ ot | ot | ot | ot | ot | ot | ot | ot | ot | ot | ot | lt ])
  || (t; [ ot | ot | ot | ot | ot | ot | ot | ot | ot | ot | ot | ot | lt ]).
120 121

(** The tactic [is_non_dependent H] determines whether the goal's conclusion or
122
hypotheses depend on [H]. *)
123 124 125 126 127 128 129
Tactic Notation "is_non_dependent" constr(H) :=
  match goal with
  | _ : context [ H ] |- _ => fail 1
  | |- context [ H ] => fail 1
  | _ => idtac
  end.

130 131
(** The tactic [var_eq x y] fails if [x] and [y] are unequal, and [var_neq]
does the converse. *)
132 133 134
Ltac var_eq x1 x2 := match x1 with x2 => idtac | _ => fail 1 end.
Ltac var_neq x1 x2 := match x1 with x2 => fail 1 | _ => idtac end.

135 136 137 138 139
(** The tactics [block_hyps] and [unblock_hyps] can be used to temporarily mark
certain hypothesis as being blocked. The tactic changes all hypothesis [H: T]
into [H: blocked T], where [blocked] is the identity function. If a hypothesis
is already blocked, it will not be blocked again. The tactic [unblock_hyps]
removes [blocked] everywhere. *)
140 141

Ltac block_hyps := repeat_on_hyps (fun H =>
142
  match type of H with block _ => idtac | ?T => change (block T) in H end).
143 144 145 146
Ltac unblock_hyps := unfold block in * |-.

(** The tactic [injection' H] is a variant of injection that introduces the
generated equalities. *)
147
Ltac injection' H := block_goal; injection H; clear H; intros; unblock_goal.
148

149 150 151 152
(** The tactic [simplify_equality] repeatedly substitutes, discriminates,
and injects equalities, and tries to contradict impossible inequalities. *)
Ltac simplify_equality := repeat
  match goal with
153 154 155 156
  | H : _  _ |- _ => by destruct H
  | H : _ = _  False |- _ => by destruct H
  | H : ?x = _ |- _ => subst x
  | H : _ = ?x |- _ => subst x
157
  | H : _ = _ |- _ => discriminate H
158
  | H : ?f _ = ?f _ |- _ => apply (injective f) in H
159
  | H : ?f _ _ = ?f _ _ |- _ => apply (injective2 f) in H; destruct H
160 161 162
    (* before [injection'] to circumvent bug #2939 in some situations *)
  | H : _ = _ |- _ => injection' H
  | H : ?x = ?x |- _ => clear H
163 164 165 166 167 168
  end.

(** Coq's default [remember] tactic does have an option to name the generated
equality. The following tactic extends [remember] to do so. *)
Tactic Notation "remember" constr(t) "as" "(" ident(x) "," ident(E) ")" :=
  remember t as x;
169
  match goal with E' : x = _ |- _ => rename E' into E end.
170

171 172 173 174
(** Given a tactic [tac2] generating a list of terms, [iter tac1 tac2]
runs [tac x] for each element [x] until [tac x] succeeds. If it does not
suceed for any element of the generated list, the whole tactic wil fail. *)
Tactic Notation "iter" tactic(tac) tactic(l) :=
175
  let rec go l :=
176
  match l with ?x :: ?l => tac x || go l end in go l.
177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197

(** Given H : [A_1 → ... → A_n → B] (where each [A_i] is non-dependent), the
tactic [feed tac H tac_by] creates a subgoal for each [A_i] and calls [tac p]
with the generated proof [p] of [B]. *)
Tactic Notation "feed" tactic(tac) constr(H) :=
  let rec go H :=
  let T := type of H in
  lazymatch eval hnf in T with
  | ?T1  ?T2 =>
    (* Use a separate counter for fresh names to make it more likely that
    the generated name is "fresh" with respect to those generated before
    calling the [feed] tactic. In particular, this hack makes sure that
    tactics like [let H' := fresh in feed (fun p => pose proof p as H') H] do
    not break. *)
    let HT1 := fresh "feed" in assert T1 as HT1;
      [| go (H HT1); clear HT1 ]
  | ?T1 => tac H
  end in go H.

(** The tactic [efeed tac H] is similar to [feed], but it also instantiates
dependent premises of [H] with evars. *)
198
Tactic Notation "efeed" constr(H) "using" tactic3(tac) "by" tactic3 (bytac) :=
199 200 201 202 203
  let rec go H :=
  let T := type of H in
  lazymatch eval hnf in T with
  | ?T1  ?T2 =>
    let HT1 := fresh "feed" in assert T1 as HT1;
204
      [bytac | go (H HT1); clear HT1 ]
205 206 207 208 209 210
  | ?T1  _ =>
    let e := fresh "feed" in evar (e:T1);
    let e' := eval unfold e in e in
    clear e; go (H e')
  | ?T1 => tac H
  end in go H.
211 212
Tactic Notation "efeed" constr(H) "using" tactic3(tac) :=
  efeed H using tac by idtac.
213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221

(** The following variants of [pose proof], [specialize], [inversion], and
[destruct], use the [feed] tactic before invoking the actual tactic. *)
Tactic Notation "feed" "pose" "proof" constr(H) "as" ident(H') :=
  feed (fun p => pose proof p as H') H.
Tactic Notation "feed" "pose" "proof" constr(H) :=
  feed (fun p => pose proof p) H.

Tactic Notation "efeed" "pose" "proof" constr(H) "as" ident(H') :=
222
  efeed H using (fun p => pose proof p as H').
223
Tactic Notation "efeed" "pose" "proof" constr(H) :=
224
  efeed H using (fun p => pose proof p).
225 226 227 228

Tactic Notation "feed" "specialize" hyp(H) :=
  feed (fun p => specialize p) H.
Tactic Notation "efeed" "specialize" hyp(H) :=
229
  efeed H using (fun p => specialize p).
230 231 232 233 234 235 236 237 238 239 240 241

Tactic Notation "feed" "inversion" constr(H) :=
  feed (fun p => let H':=fresh in pose proof p as H'; inversion H') H.
Tactic Notation "feed" "inversion" constr(H) "as" simple_intropattern(IP) :=
  feed (fun p => let H':=fresh in pose proof p as H'; inversion H' as IP) H.

Tactic Notation "feed" "destruct" constr(H) :=
  feed (fun p => let H':=fresh in pose proof p as H'; destruct H') H.
Tactic Notation "feed" "destruct" constr(H) "as" simple_intropattern(IP) :=
  feed (fun p => let H':=fresh in pose proof p as H'; destruct H' as IP) H.

(** Coq's [firstorder] tactic fails or loops on rather small goals already. In 
242 243 244 245
particular, on those generated by the tactic [unfold_elem_ofs] which is used
to solve propositions on collections. The [naive_solver] tactic implements an
ad-hoc and incomplete [firstorder]-like solver using Ltac's backtracking
mechanism. The tactic suffers from the following limitations:
246
- It might leave unresolved evars as Ltac provides no way to detect that.
247 248
- To avoid the tactic becoming too slow, we allow a universally quantified
  hypothesis to be instantiated only once during each search path.
249 250 251
- It does not perform backtracking on instantiation of universally quantified
  assumptions.

252 253 254 255
We use a counter to make the search breath first. Breath first search ensures
that a minimal number of hypotheses is instantiated, and thus reduced the
posibility that an evar remains unresolved.

256 257 258
Despite these limitations, it works much better than Coq's [firstorder] tactic
for the purposes of this development. This tactic either fails or proves the
goal. *)
259 260 261 262
Lemma forall_and_distr (A : Type) (P Q : A  Prop) :
  ( x, P x  Q x)  ( x, P x)  ( x, Q x).
Proof. firstorder. Qed.

263 264
Tactic Notation "naive_solver" tactic(tac) :=
  unfold iff, not in *;
265 266 267 268
  repeat match goal with
  | H : context [ _, _  _ ] |- _ =>
     repeat setoid_rewrite forall_and_distr in H; revert H
  end;
269
  let rec go n :=
270 271 272 273 274 275 276
  repeat match goal with
  (**i intros *)
  | |-  _, _ => intro
  (**i simplification of assumptions *)
  | H : False |- _ => destruct H
  | H : _  _ |- _ => destruct H
  | H :  _, _  |- _ => destruct H
277
  | H : ?P  ?Q, H2 : ?Q |- _ => specialize (H H2)
278 279 280 281
  (**i simplify and solve equalities *)
  | |- _ => progress simpl in *
  | |- _ => progress simplify_equality
  (**i solve the goal *)
282 283 284 285 286 287
  | |- _ =>
    solve
    [ eassumption
    | symmetry; eassumption
    | apply not_symmetry; eassumption
    | reflexivity ]
288 289 290 291 292 293
  (**i operations that generate more subgoals *)
  | |- _  _ => split
  | H : _  _ |- _ => destruct H
  (**i solve the goal using the user supplied tactic *)
  | |- _ => solve [tac]
  end;
294 295 296 297 298 299 300 301 302 303 304 305 306 307 308 309 310 311 312 313 314 315
  (**i use recursion to enable backtracking on the following clauses. *)
  match goal with
  (**i instantiation of the conclusion *)
  | |-  x, _ => eexists; go n
  | |- _  _ => first [left; go n | right; go n]
  | _ =>
    (**i instantiations of assumptions. *)
    lazymatch n with
    | S ?n' =>
      (**i we give priority to assumptions that fit on the conclusion. *)
      match goal with 
      | H : _  _ |- _ =>
        is_non_dependent H;
        eapply H; clear H; go n'
      | H : _  _ |- _ =>
        is_non_dependent H;
        try (eapply H; fail 2);
        efeed pose proof H; clear H; go n'
      end
    end
  end
  in iter (fun n' => go n') (eval compute in (seq 0 6)).
316
Tactic Notation "naive_solver" := naive_solver eauto.