Skip to content
GitLab
Explore
Sign in
Primary navigation
Search or go to…
Project
A
Actris
Manage
Activity
Members
Labels
Plan
Issues
Issue boards
Milestones
Wiki
Code
Merge requests
Repository
Branches
Commits
Tags
Repository graph
Compare revisions
Snippets
Build
Pipelines
Jobs
Pipeline schedules
Artifacts
Deploy
Releases
Package Registry
Model registry
Operate
Environments
Terraform modules
Monitor
Incidents
Service Desk
Analyze
Value stream analytics
Contributor analytics
CI/CD analytics
Repository analytics
Model experiments
Help
Help
Support
GitLab documentation
Compare GitLab plans
Community forum
Contribute to GitLab
Provide feedback
Terms and privacy
Keyboard shortcuts
?
Snippets
Groups
Projects
Show more breadcrumbs
Dan Frumin
Actris
Commits
2551c007
Commit
2551c007
authored
4 years ago
by
Jonas Kastberg
Browse files
Options
Downloads
Patches
Plain Diff
Addressed binder rules in README
parent
9ff97c9f
No related branches found
Branches containing commit
No related tags found
Tags containing commit
No related merge requests found
Changes
1
Hide whitespace changes
Inline
Side-by-side
Showing
1 changed file
papers/LMCS.md
+16
-0
16 additions, 0 deletions
papers/LMCS.md
with
16 additions
and
0 deletions
papers/LMCS.md
+
16
−
0
View file @
2551c007
...
...
@@ -16,3 +16,19 @@ Subprotocols
Mechanisation
-
Program:
[
theories/examples/basics.v
](
../theories/examples/basics.v
)
-
Subprotocol:
[
theories/examples/list_rev.v
](
../theories/examples/list_rev.v
)
## Differences between the formalization and the paper
There are a number of small differences between the paper presentation
of Actris 2.0 and the formalization in Coq, beyond those already covered
in
[
papers/POPL20.md
](
POPL20.md
)
, that are briefly discussed here.
**Subprotocol rules with binders**
The paper presents a set of rules for the subprotocol relation with binders,
namely
`⊑-send-mono'`
,
`⊑-recv-mono'`
, and
`⊑-swap'`
. These are not available
in the mechanisation, for technical reasons related to the encoding of binders.
However, the rules are admissible from the primitive rules, as explained in the
paper. The consequence of this is observed in the proof of the Löb recursion
example, which differs from the proof presented in the paper, as it uses the
rules with binders.
This diff is collapsed.
Click to expand it.
Preview
0%
Loading
Try again
or
attach a new file
.
Cancel
You are about to add
0
people
to the discussion. Proceed with caution.
Finish editing this message first!
Save comment
Cancel
Please
register
or
sign in
to comment