- Nov 27, 2016
-
-
Robbert Krebbers authored
-
Robbert Krebbers authored
-
- Nov 26, 2016
-
-
Robbert Krebbers authored
-
Robbert Krebbers authored
-
- Nov 25, 2016
-
-
Robbert Krebbers authored
-
Ralf Jung authored
-
Ralf Jung authored
-
Ralf Jung authored
-
Robbert Krebbers authored
-
Robbert Krebbers authored
-
Jacques-Henri Jourdan authored
-
Robbert Krebbers authored
-
Robbert Krebbers authored
-
Robbert Krebbers authored
No longer `put box_own_prop γ P` in the invariant, it is persistent.
-
Jacques-Henri Jourdan authored
-
- Nov 24, 2016
-
-
Jacques-Henri Jourdan authored
-
-
Jacques-Henri Jourdan authored
-
-
Ralf Jung authored
-
Jacques-Henri Jourdan authored
-
Robbert Krebbers authored
-
Robbert Krebbers authored
-
Robbert Krebbers authored
-
Jacques-Henri Jourdan authored
The idea on magic wand is to use it for curried lemmas and use ⊢ for uncurried lemmas.
-
Robbert Krebbers authored
ProofMode intro patterns: accept _ as part of variable names @robbertkrebbers beat this. ;) See merge request !29
-
Ralf Jung authored
-
- Nov 23, 2016
-
-
Ralf Jung authored
-
Ralf Jung authored
-
Ralf Jung authored
-
Robbert Krebbers authored
-
Ralf Jung authored
Use notation N @⊆ E to avoid ambiguity. Since `nclose : namespace → coPset` is declared as a coercion, the notation `nclose N ⊆ E` was pretty printed as `N ⊆ E`. However, `N ⊆ E` could not be typechecked because type checking goes from left to right, and as such would look for an instance `SubsetEq namespace`, which causes the right hand side to be ill-typed. See merge request !24
-
Ralf Jung authored
Fractional typeclass. A typeclass for fractional assertions, that is assertions that depend on a fraction and that can be split. This is used to derive generically a few other instances for framing , destructing, combining and spliting assertions of sums of fractions. I found it usefull when doing fraction-heavy proofs in LambdaRust. The Right Way To Do It would be to use a typeclass over the *predicate* itself. Unfortunately, the unification algorithm of typeclasses is not powerful enough to do the right beta-expansion that would expose the predicate applied to some fraction. Instead, the `Fractional` type class has as parameters both the predicate and the applied form that can be directly unified with the fractured assertion. Not very pretty. I wonder whether I should split this into two type classes: the first one would depend only on the predicate and would actually state the fractionality of it, and the second would do the beta-expansion job. What do you think? See merge request !23
-
-
Robbert Krebbers authored
-
Robbert Krebbers authored
-
Robbert Krebbers authored
-
Robbert Krebbers authored
-
Ralf Jung authored
-
- Nov 22, 2016
-
-
Robbert Krebbers authored
-