Skip to content
Snippets Groups Projects
  1. Nov 20, 2017
  2. Nov 09, 2017
  3. Oct 28, 2017
  4. Oct 27, 2017
  5. Sep 21, 2017
  6. Sep 17, 2017
    • Robbert Krebbers's avatar
      Set Hint Mode for all classes in `base.v`. · 7d7c9871
      Robbert Krebbers authored
      This provides significant robustness against looping type class search.
      
      As a consequence, at many places throughout the library we had to add
      additional typing information to lemmas. This was to be expected, since
      most of the old lemmas were ambiguous. For example:
      
        Section fin_collection.
          Context `{FinCollection A C}.
      
          size_singleton (x : A) : size {[ x ]} = 1.
      
      In this case, the lemma does not tell us which `FinCollection` with
      elements `A` we are talking about. So, `{[ x ]}` could not only refer to
      the singleton operation of the `FinCollection A C` in the section, but
      also to any other `FinCollection` in the development. To make this lemma
      unambigious, it should be written as:
      
        Lemma size_singleton (x : A) : size ({[ x ]} : C) = 1.
      
      In similar spirit, lemmas like the one below were also ambiguous:
      
        Lemma lookup_alter_None {A} (f : A → A) m i j :
          alter f i m !! j = None :left_right_arrow: m !! j = None.
      
      It is not clear which finite map implementation we are talking about.
      To make this lemma unambigious, it should be written as:
      
        Lemma lookup_alter_None {A} (f : A → A) (m : M A) i j :
          alter f i m !! j = None :left_right_arrow: m !! j = None.
      
      That is, we have to specify the type of `m`.
      7d7c9871
  7. Sep 08, 2017
  8. Sep 06, 2017
  9. Apr 01, 2017
  10. Mar 15, 2017
  11. Mar 09, 2017
  12. Feb 16, 2017
  13. Feb 15, 2017
  14. Jan 31, 2017
  15. Nov 29, 2016
  16. Nov 23, 2016
  17. Nov 21, 2016
  18. Nov 20, 2016
  19. Oct 03, 2016
  20. Sep 20, 2016
  21. Aug 08, 2016
    • Ralf Jung's avatar
      Better Coq 8.6 compatibility · 976c58f3
      Ralf Jung authored
      With Coq 8.6, you can no longer have intro patterns that give more names than
      the constructor has.  Also, patterns with too few names are now interpreted as
      filling up with "?", rather than putting the unnamed parts into the goal again.
      
      Furthermore, it seems the behavior of "simplify_eq/=" changed, I guess
      hypotheses are considered in different order now.  I managed to work around
      this, but it all seem kind of fragile.
      
      The next compilation failure is an "Anyomaly: ... Please report", so that's what I will do.
      976c58f3
  22. Aug 02, 2016
  23. Jul 27, 2016
  24. Jul 22, 2016
  25. Jul 12, 2016
  26. Jul 11, 2016
  27. Jul 05, 2016
  28. May 31, 2016
  29. Mar 23, 2016
Loading