It is now able to destruct:
- [own γ (a1 ⋅ a1)] into [own γ a1] and [own γ a2]
- [own γ a] into [own γ a] and [own γ a] if [a] is persistent
- [own γ (a,b)] by proceeding recursively.
- [own γ (Some a)] by preceeding resursively.

Based on an idea and WIP commits of J-H. Jourdan: the core of a CMRA
A is now a partial function A → option A.

TODO: define sum CMRA
TODO: remove one shot CMRA and define it in terms of sum

We git this from monotonicity now.

The good news is, this one works without FSAs, and it can be applied around the "view shift with a step"-thing.
Furthermore, the FSA lemma can be derived from the new one.
The bad news is, the FSA lemma proof doesn't even get shorter in doing this change.

- Make the carrier argument of the constructors for the canonical structures
  cofeT and cmraT explicit. This way we make sure the carrier is properly
  exposed, instead of some alias of the carrier.
- Make derived constructions (such as discreteC and discreteR) notations
  instead of definitions. This is yet again to make sure that the carrier is
  properly exposed.
- Turn DRA into a canonical structure (it used to be a type class).

This fixes some issues, notably it fixes some broken rewrites in algebra/sts
and it makes canonical structures work properly with dec_agree.

Rationale: to make the code closer to what is on paper, I want the notations
to look like quantifiers, i.e. have a binder built-in. I thus introduced the
following notations:

  [★ map] k ↦ x ∈ m, P
  [★ set] x ∈ X, P

The good thing - contrary to the notations that we had before that required an
explicit lambda - is that type annotations of k and x are now not printed
making goals much easier to read.

To do so, we have introduced the specialization patterns:

  =>[H1 .. Hn] and =>[-H1 .. Hn]

That generate a goal in which the view shift is preserved. These specialization
patterns can also be used for e.g. iApply.

Note that this machinery is not tied to primitive view shifts, and works for
various kinds of goal (as captured by the ToAssert type class, which describes
how to transform the asserted goal based on the main goal).

TODO: change the name of these specialization patterns to reflect this
generality.

Changes:
- We no longer have a different syntax for specializing a term H : P -★ Q whose
  range P or domain Q is persistent. There is just one syntax, and the system
  automatically determines whether either P or Q is persistent.
- While specializing a term, always modalities are automatically stripped. This
  gets rid of the specialization pattern !.
- Make the syntax of specialization patterns more consistent. The syntax for
  generating a goal is [goal_spec] where goal_spec is one of the following:

    H1 .. Hn : generate a goal using hypotheses H1 .. Hn
   -H1 .. Hn : generate a goal using all hypotheses but H1 .. Hn
           # : generate a goal for the premise in which all hypotheses can be
               used. This is only allowed when specializing H : P -★ Q where
               either P or Q is persistent.
           % : generate a goal for a pure premise.

Initial commit by Amin Timany.