Skip to content
GitLab
Explore
Sign in
Primary navigation
Search or go to…
Project
S
stdpp
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
Model registry
Operate
Environments
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
Maxime Dénès
stdpp
Commits
461bc9c9
Commit
461bc9c9
authored
7 years ago
by
Ralf Jung
Browse files
Options
Downloads
Patches
Plain Diff
f_equiv: comments
parent
e1fff8e2
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
theories/tactics.v
+7
-7
7 additions, 7 deletions
theories/tactics.v
with
7 additions
and
7 deletions
theories/tactics.v
+
7
−
7
View file @
461bc9c9
...
...
@@ -304,18 +304,18 @@ Ltac f_equiv :=
|
|
-
(
?R
_)
(
?f
_
_
_
_)
_
=>
simple
apply
(_
:
Proper
(
R
_
==>
R
_
==>
R
_
==>
R
_
==>
_)
f
)
|
|
-
(
?R
_
_)
(
?f
_
_
_
_)
_
=>
simple
apply
(_
:
Proper
(
R
_
_
==>
R
_
_
==>
R
_
_
==>
R
_
_
==>
_)
f
)
|
|
-
(
?R
_
_
_)
(
?f
_
_
_
_)
_
=>
simple
apply
(_
:
Proper
(
R
_
_
_
==>
R
_
_
_
R
_
_
_
==>
R
_
_
_
==>
_)
f
)
(* Next, try to infer the relation. Unfortunately,
there is an instance
of Proper for (eq ==> _), which will always be matched
. *)
(* Next, try to infer the relation. Unfortunately,
very often, it will turn
the goal into a Leibniz equality so we get stuck
. *)
(* TODO: Can we exclude that instance? *)
(* TODO: If some of the arguments are the same, we could also
query for "pointwise_relation"'s. But that leads to a combinatorial
explosion about which arguments are and which are not the same. *)
|
|
-
?R
(
?f
_)
_
=>
simple
apply
(_
:
Proper
(_
==>
R
)
f
)
|
|
-
?R
(
?f
_
_)
_
=>
simple
apply
(_
:
Proper
(_
==>
_
==>
R
)
f
)
|
|
-
?R
(
?f
_
_
_)
_
=>
simple
apply
(_
:
Proper
(_
==>
_
==>
_
==>
R
)
f
)
|
|
-
?R
(
?f
_
_
_
_)
_
=>
simple
apply
(_
:
Proper
(_
==>
_
==>
_
==>
_
==>
R
)
f
)
(* In case the function symbol differs, but the arguments are the same,
maybe we have a pointwise_relation in our context. *)
(* In case the function symbol differs, but the arguments are the same,
maybe we have a pointwise_relation in our context. *)
(* TODO: If only some of the arguments are the same, we could also
query for "pointwise_relation"'s. But that leads to a combinatorial
explosion about which arguments are and which are not the same. *)
|
H
:
pointwise_relation
_
?R
?f
?g
|
-
?R
(
?f
?x
)
(
?g
?x
)
=>
simple
apply
H
end
;
try
simple
apply
reflexivity
.
...
...
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