Skip to content
GitLab
Menu
Projects
Groups
Snippets
Loading...
Help
Help
Support
Community forum
Keyboard shortcuts
?
Submit feedback
Contribute to GitLab
Sign in / Register
Toggle navigation
Menu
Open sidebar
David Swasey
coqstdpp
Commits
9d0d6825
Commit
9d0d6825
authored
Feb 22, 2013
by
Robbert Krebbers
Browse files
Update prelude. Reorganize list functions.
parent
415a4f1c
Changes
8
Expand all
Hide whitespace changes
Inline
Sidebyside
Showing
8 changed files
with
1045 additions
and
868 deletions
+1045
868
theories/base.v
theories/base.v
+19
2
theories/list.v
theories/list.v
+894
799
theories/mapset.v
theories/mapset.v
+8
3
theories/nmap.v
theories/nmap.v
+9
3
theories/option.v
theories/option.v
+56
1
theories/orders.v
theories/orders.v
+7
7
theories/pmap.v
theories/pmap.v
+1
1
theories/tactics.v
theories/tactics.v
+51
52
No files found.
theories/base.v
View file @
9d0d6825
...
...
@@ 266,6 +266,22 @@ Class Filter A B :=
(* Arguments filter {_ _ _} _ {_} !_ / : simpl nomatch. *)
(** We define variants of the relations [(≡)] and [(⊆)] that are indexed by
an environment. *)
Class
EquivEnv
A
B
:
=
equiv_env
:
A
→
relation
B
.
Notation
"X ≡@{ E } Y"
:
=
(
equiv_env
E
X
Y
)
(
at
level
70
,
format
"X ≡@{ E } Y"
)
:
C_scope
.
Notation
"(≡@{ E } )"
:
=
(
equiv_env
E
)
(
E
at
level
1
,
only
parsing
)
:
C_scope
.
Instance
:
Params
(@
equiv_env
)
4
.
Class
SubsetEqEnv
A
B
:
=
subseteq_env
:
A
→
relation
B
.
Notation
"X ⊆@{ E } Y"
:
=
(
subseteq_env
E
X
Y
)
(
at
level
70
,
format
"X ⊆@{ E } Y"
)
:
C_scope
.
Notation
"(⊆@{ E } )"
:
=
(
subseteq_env
E
)
(
E
at
level
1
,
only
parsing
)
:
C_scope
.
Instance
:
Params
(@
subseteq_env
)
4
.
(** ** Monadic operations *)
(** We define operational type classes for the monadic operations bind, join
and fmap. These type classes are defined in a nonstandard way by taking the
...
...
@@ 282,7 +298,7 @@ in the appropriate way, and so that it can be used for mutual recursion
(the mapped function [f] is not part of the fixpoint) as well. This is a hack,
and should be replaced by something more appropriate in future versions. *)
(* We use these type classes merely for convenient overloading of notations and
(*
*
We use these type classes merely for convenient overloading of notations and
do not formalize any theory on monads (we do not even define a class with the
monad laws). *)
Class
MRet
(
M
:
Type
→
Type
)
:
=
mret
:
∀
{
A
},
A
→
M
A
.
...
...
@@ 316,11 +332,12 @@ Class MGuard (M : Type → Type) :=
mguard
:
∀
P
{
dec
:
Decision
P
}
{
A
},
M
A
→
M
A
.
Notation
"'guard' P ; o"
:
=
(
mguard
P
o
)
(
at
level
65
,
only
parsing
,
next
at
level
35
,
right
associativity
)
:
C_scope
.
Arguments
mguard
_
_
_
!
_
_
!
_
/
:
simpl
nomatch
.
(** ** Operations on maps *)
(** In this section we define operational type classes for the operations
on maps. In the file [fin_maps] we will axiomatize finite maps.
The function lookup [m !! k] should yield the element at key [k] in [m]. *)
The function look
up [m !! k] should yield the element at key [k] in [m]. *)
Class
Lookup
(
K
A
M
:
Type
)
:
=
lookup
:
K
→
M
→
option
A
.
Instance
:
Params
(@
lookup
)
4
.
...
...
theories/list.v
View file @
9d0d6825
This diff is collapsed.
Click to expand it.
theories/mapset.v
View file @
9d0d6825
...
...
@@ 47,9 +47,14 @@ Proof.
apply
option_eq
.
intros
[].
by
apply
E
.
Qed
.
Global
Instance
mapset_eq_dec
`
{
∀
m1
m2
:
M
unit
,
Decision
(
m1
=
m2
)}
:
∀
X1
X2
:
mapset
M
,
Decision
(
X1
=
X2
)

1
.
Proof
.
solve_decision
.
Defined
.
Global
Instance
mapset_eq_dec
`
{
∀
m1
m2
:
M
unit
,
Decision
(
m1
=
m2
)}
(
X1
X2
:
mapset
M
)
:
Decision
(
X1
=
X2
)

1
.
Proof
.
refine
match
X1
,
X2
with

Mapset
m1
,
Mapset
m2
=>
cast_if
(
decide
(
m1
=
m2
))
end
;
abstract
congruence
.
Defined
.
Global
Instance
mapset_elem_of_dec
x
(
X
:
mapset
M
)
:
Decision
(
x
∈
X
)

1
.
Proof
.
solve_decision
.
Defined
.
...
...
theories/nmap.v
View file @
9d0d6825
...
...
@@ 12,9 +12,15 @@ Arguments Nmap_0 {_} _.
Arguments
Nmap_pos
{
_
}
_
.
Arguments
NMap
{
_
}
_
_
.
Instance
Pmap_dec
`
{
∀
x
y
:
A
,
Decision
(
x
=
y
)}
:
∀
x
y
:
Nmap
A
,
Decision
(
x
=
y
).
Proof
.
solve_decision
.
Defined
.
Instance
Nmap_eq_dec
`
{
∀
x
y
:
A
,
Decision
(
x
=
y
)}
(
t1
t2
:
Nmap
A
)
:
Decision
(
t1
=
t2
).
Proof
.
refine
match
t1
,
t2
with

NMap
x
t1
,
NMap
y
t2
=>
cast_if_and
(
decide
(
x
=
y
))
(
decide
(
t1
=
t2
))
end
;
abstract
congruence
.
Defined
.
Instance
Nempty
{
A
}
:
Empty
(
Nmap
A
)
:
=
NMap
None
∅
.
Instance
Nlookup
{
A
}
:
Lookup
N
A
(
Nmap
A
)
:
=
λ
i
t
,
...
...
theories/option.v
View file @
9d0d6825
...
...
@@ 122,6 +122,14 @@ Instance option_fmap: FMap option := @option_map.
Instance
option_guard
:
MGuard
option
:
=
λ
P
dec
A
x
,
if
dec
then
x
else
None
.
Definition
mapM
`
{!
MBind
M
}
`
{!
MRet
M
}
{
A
B
}
(
f
:
A
→
M
B
)
:
list
A
→
M
(
list
B
)
:
=
fix
go
l
:
=
match
l
with

[]
=>
mret
[]

x
::
l
=>
y
←
f
x
;
k
←
go
l
;
mret
(
y
::
k
)
end
.
Lemma
fmap_is_Some
{
A
B
}
(
f
:
A
→
B
)
(
x
:
option
A
)
:
is_Some
(
f
<$>
x
)
↔
is_Some
x
.
Proof
.
split
;
inversion
1
.
by
destruct
x
.
done
.
Qed
.
...
...
@@ 138,6 +146,51 @@ Proof. by destruct x. Qed.
Lemma
option_bind_assoc
{
A
B
C
}
(
f
:
A
→
option
B
)
(
g
:
B
→
option
C
)
(
x
:
option
A
)
:
(
x
≫
=
f
)
≫
=
g
=
x
≫
=
(
mbind
g
∘
f
).
Proof
.
by
destruct
x
;
simpl
.
Qed
.
Lemma
option_bind_ext
{
A
B
}
(
f
g
:
A
→
option
B
)
x
y
:
(
∀
a
,
f
a
=
g
a
)
→
x
=
y
→
x
≫
=
f
=
y
≫
=
g
.
Proof
.
intros
.
destruct
x
,
y
;
simplify_equality
;
simpl
;
auto
.
Qed
.
Lemma
option_bind_ext_fun
{
A
B
}
(
f
g
:
A
→
option
B
)
x
:
(
∀
a
,
f
a
=
g
a
)
→
x
≫
=
f
=
x
≫
=
g
.
Proof
.
intros
.
by
apply
option_bind_ext
.
Qed
.
Section
mapM
.
Context
{
A
B
:
Type
}
(
f
:
A
→
option
B
).
Lemma
mapM_ext
(
g
:
A
→
option
B
)
l
:
(
∀
x
,
f
x
=
g
x
)
→
mapM
f
l
=
mapM
g
l
.
Proof
.
intros
Hfg
.
by
induction
l
;
simpl
;
rewrite
?Hfg
,
?IHl
.
Qed
.
Lemma
Forall2_mapM_ext
(
g
:
A
→
option
B
)
l
k
:
Forall2
(
λ
x
y
,
f
x
=
g
y
)
l
k
→
mapM
f
l
=
mapM
g
k
.
Proof
.
induction
1
as
[????
Hfg
?
IH
]
;
simpl
.
done
.
by
rewrite
Hfg
,
IH
.
Qed
.
Lemma
Forall_mapM_ext
(
g
:
A
→
option
B
)
l
:
Forall
(
λ
x
,
f
x
=
g
x
)
l
→
mapM
f
l
=
mapM
g
l
.
Proof
.
induction
1
as
[??
Hfg
?
IH
]
;
simpl
.
done
.
by
rewrite
Hfg
,
IH
.
Qed
.
Lemma
mapM_Some_1
l
k
:
mapM
f
l
=
Some
k
→
Forall2
(
λ
x
y
,
f
x
=
Some
y
)
l
k
.
Proof
.
revert
k
.
induction
l
as
[
x
l
]
;
intros
[
y
k
]
;
simpl
;
try
done
.
*
destruct
(
f
x
)
;
simpl
;
[
discriminate
].
by
destruct
(
mapM
f
l
).
*
destruct
(
f
x
)
eqn
:
?
;
simpl
;
[
discriminate
].
destruct
(
mapM
f
l
)
;
intros
;
simplify_equality
.
constructor
;
auto
.
Qed
.
Lemma
mapM_Some_2
l
k
:
Forall2
(
λ
x
y
,
f
x
=
Some
y
)
l
k
→
mapM
f
l
=
Some
k
.
Proof
.
induction
1
as
[????
Hf
?
IH
]
;
simpl
;
[
done
].
rewrite
Hf
.
simpl
.
by
rewrite
IH
.
Qed
.
Lemma
mapM_Some
l
k
:
mapM
f
l
=
Some
k
↔
Forall2
(
λ
x
y
,
f
x
=
Some
y
)
l
k
.
Proof
.
split
;
auto
using
mapM_Some_1
,
mapM_Some_2
.
Qed
.
End
mapM
.
Tactic
Notation
"simplify_option_equality"
"by"
tactic3
(
tac
)
:
=
repeat
match
goal
with
...
...
@@ 222,11 +275,13 @@ Tactic Notation "simplify_option_equality" "by" tactic3(tac) := repeat
assert
(
y
=
x
)
by
congruence
;
clear
H2

H1
:
?o
=
Some
?x
,
H2
:
?o
=
None

_
=>
congruence

H
:
mapM
_
_
=
Some
_

_
=>
apply
mapM_Some
in
H
end
.
Tactic
Notation
"simplify_option_equality"
:
=
simplify_option_equality
by
eauto
.
Hint
Extern
100
=>
simplify_option_equality
:
simplify_option_equality
.
Hint
Extern
800
=>
progress
simplify_option_equality
:
simplify_option_equality
.
(** * Union, intersection and difference *)
Instance
option_union_with
{
A
}
:
UnionWith
A
(
option
A
)
:
=
λ
f
x
y
,
...
...
theories/orders.v
View file @
9d0d6825
...
...
@@ 209,7 +209,7 @@ Section bounded_join_sl.
by
transitivity
(
X
∪
Y
)
;
[
auto

rewrite
E
].
*
intros
[
E1
E2
].
by
rewrite
E1
,
E2
,
(
left_id
_
_
).
Qed
.
Lemma
empty_
list_
union
Xs
:
⋃
Xs
≡
∅
↔
Forall
(
≡
∅
)
Xs
.
Lemma
empty_union
_list
Xs
:
⋃
Xs
≡
∅
↔
Forall
(
≡
∅
)
Xs
.
Proof
.
split
.
*
induction
Xs
;
simpl
;
rewrite
?empty_union
;
intuition
.
...
...
@@ 248,8 +248,8 @@ Section bounded_join_sl.
Lemma
empty_union_L
X
Y
:
X
∪
Y
=
∅
↔
X
=
∅
∧
Y
=
∅
.
Proof
.
unfold_leibniz
.
apply
empty_union
.
Qed
.
Lemma
empty_
list_
union_L
Xs
:
⋃
Xs
=
∅
↔
Forall
(=
∅
)
Xs
.
Proof
.
unfold_leibniz
.
apply
empty_
list_
union
.
Qed
.
Lemma
empty_union
_list
_L
Xs
:
⋃
Xs
=
∅
↔
Forall
(=
∅
)
Xs
.
Proof
.
unfold_leibniz
.
apply
empty_union
_list
.
Qed
.
End
leibniz
.
Section
dec
.
...
...
@@ 257,14 +257,14 @@ Section bounded_join_sl.
Lemma
non_empty_union
X
Y
:
X
∪
Y
≢
∅
→
X
≢
∅
∨
Y
≢
∅
.
Proof
.
rewrite
empty_union
.
destruct
(
decide
(
X
≡
∅
))
;
intuition
.
Qed
.
Lemma
non_empty_
list_
union
Xs
:
⋃
Xs
≢
∅
→
Exists
(
≢
∅
)
Xs
.
Proof
.
rewrite
empty_
list_
union
.
apply
(
not_Forall_Exists
_
).
Qed
.
Lemma
non_empty_union
_list
Xs
:
⋃
Xs
≢
∅
→
Exists
(
≢
∅
)
Xs
.
Proof
.
rewrite
empty_union
_list
.
apply
(
not_Forall_Exists
_
).
Qed
.
Context
`
{!
LeibnizEquiv
A
}.
Lemma
non_empty_union_L
X
Y
:
X
∪
Y
≠
∅
→
X
≠
∅
∨
Y
≠
∅
.
Proof
.
unfold_leibniz
.
apply
non_empty_union
.
Qed
.
Lemma
non_empty_
list_
union_L
Xs
:
⋃
Xs
≠
∅
→
Exists
(
≠
∅
)
Xs
.
Proof
.
unfold_leibniz
.
apply
non_empty_
list_
union
.
Qed
.
Lemma
non_empty_union
_list
_L
Xs
:
⋃
Xs
≠
∅
→
Exists
(
≠
∅
)
Xs
.
Proof
.
unfold_leibniz
.
apply
non_empty_union
_list
.
Qed
.
End
dec
.
End
bounded_join_sl
.
...
...
theories/pmap.v
View file @
9d0d6825
...
...
@@ 69,7 +69,7 @@ thereby obtain a data type that ensures canonicity. *)
Definition
Pmap
A
:
=
dsig
(@
Pmap_wf
A
).
(** * Operations on the data structure *)
Global
Instance
Pmap_dec
`
{
∀
x
y
:
A
,
Decision
(
x
=
y
)}
(
t1
t2
:
Pmap
A
)
:
Global
Instance
Pmap_
eq_
dec
`
{
∀
x
y
:
A
,
Decision
(
x
=
y
)}
(
t1
t2
:
Pmap
A
)
:
Decision
(
t1
=
t2
)
:
=
match
Pmap_raw_eq_dec
(
`
t1
)
(
`
t2
)
with

left
H
=>
left
(
proj2
(
dsig_eq
_
t1
t2
)
H
)
...
...
theories/tactics.v
View file @
9d0d6825
...
...
@@ 55,14 +55,10 @@ Ltac case_match :=


context
[
match
?x
with
_
=>
_
end
]
=>
destruct
x
eqn
:
?
end
.
(** The tactic [assert T unless tac_fail by tac_success] is used to assert
[T] only if it is not provable by [tac_fail]. This is useful to build other
tactics where only propositions that are not trivially provable are being
asserted. *)
Tactic
Notation
"assert"
constr
(
T
)
"unless"
tactic3
(
tac_fail
)
"by"
tactic3
(
tac_success
)
:
=
first
[
assert
T
by
tac_fail
;
fail
1

assert
T
by
tac_success
].
(** 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
].
(** The tactic [repeat_on_hyps tac] repeatedly applies [tac] in unspecified
order on all hypotheses until it cannot be applied to any hypothesis anymore. *)
...
...
@@ 255,21 +251,33 @@ 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
particular, on those generated by the tactic [unfold_elem_ofs]
to solve
propositions on collections. The [naive_solver] tactic implements an
adhoc
and incomplete [firstorder]like solver using Ltac's backtracking
mechanism.
The tactic suffers from the following limitations:
particular, on those generated by the tactic [unfold_elem_ofs]
which is used
to solve
propositions on collections. The [naive_solver] tactic implements an
adhoc
and incomplete [firstorder]like solver using Ltac's backtracking
mechanism.
The tactic suffers from the following limitations:
 It might leave unresolved evars as Ltac provides no way to detect that.
 To avoid the tactic
going into pointless loops, it just does not allow a
universally quantified hypothesis to be used more than once
.
 To avoid the tactic
becoming too slow, we allow a universally quantified
hypothesis to be instantiated only once during each search path
.
 It does not perform backtracking on instantiation of universally quantified
assumptions.
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.
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. *)
Lemma
forall_and_distr
(
A
:
Type
)
(
P
Q
:
A
→
Prop
)
:
(
∀
x
,
P
x
∧
Q
x
)
↔
(
∀
x
,
P
x
)
∧
(
∀
x
,
Q
x
).
Proof
.
firstorder
.
Qed
.
Tactic
Notation
"naive_solver"
tactic
(
tac
)
:
=
unfold
iff
,
not
in
*
;
repeat
match
goal
with

H
:
context
[
∀
_
,
_
∧
_
]

_
=>
repeat
setoid_rewrite
forall_and_distr
in
H
;
revert
H
end
;
let
rec
go
n
:
=
repeat
match
goal
with
(**i intros *)
...
...
@@ 278,52 +286,43 @@ Tactic Notation "naive_solver" tactic(tac) :=

H
:
False

_
=>
destruct
H

H
:
_
∧
_

_
=>
destruct
H

H
:
∃
_
,
_

_
=>
destruct
H

H
:
?P
→
?Q
,
H2
:
?Q

_
=>
specialize
(
H
H2
)
(**i simplify and solve equalities *)


_
=>
progress
simpl
in
*


_
=>
progress
simplify_equality
(**i solve the goal *)


_
=>
solve
[
eassumption

symmetry
;
eassumption

apply
not_symmetry
;
eassumption

reflexivity
]


_
=>
solve
[
eassumption

symmetry
;
eassumption

apply
not_symmetry
;
eassumption

reflexivity
]
(**i operations that generate more subgoals *)


_
∧
_
=>
split

H
:
_
∨
_

_
=>
destruct
H
(**i solve the goal using the user supplied tactic *)


_
=>
solve
[
tac
]
end
;
(**i use recursion to enable backtracking on the following clauses. We use
a counter to minimize the number of instantiations, and thus to reduce the
number of potentially unresolved meta variables. *)
first
[
iter
(
fun
n'
=>
match
goal
with
(**i instantiations of assumptions *)

H
:
_
→
_

_
=>
is_non_dependent
H
;
eapply
H
;
clear
H
;
go
n'

H
:
_
→
_

_
=>
is_non_dependent
H
;
(**i create subgoals for all premises *)
efeed
H
using
(
fun
p
=>
match
type
of
p
with

_
∧
_
=>
let
H'
:
=
fresh
in
pose
proof
p
as
H'
;
destruct
H'

∃
_
,
_
=>
let
H'
:
=
fresh
in
pose
proof
p
as
H'
;
destruct
H'

_
∨
_
=>
let
H'
:
=
fresh
in
pose
proof
p
as
H'
;
destruct
H'

False
=>
let
H'
:
=
fresh
in
pose
proof
p
as
H'
;
destruct
H'
end
)
by
(
clear
H
;
go
n'
)
;
(**i solve these subgoals, but clear [H] to avoid loops *)
clear
H
;
go
n
end
)
(
eval
compute
in
(
seq
0
n
))

match
goal
with
(**i instantiation of the conclusion *)


∃
x
,
_
=>
eexists
;
go
n


_
∨
_
=>
first
[
left
;
go
n

right
;
go
n
]
end
]
in
go
10
.
(**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
)).
Tactic
Notation
"naive_solver"
:
=
naive_solver
eauto
.
Write
Preview
Markdown
is supported
0%
Try again
or
attach a new file
.
Attach a file
Cancel
You are about to add
0
people
to the discussion. Proceed with caution.
Finish editing this message first!
Cancel
Please
register
or
sign in
to comment