feat: variant for up-to-bad call/proc tactics#1055
Draft
loutr wants to merge 2 commits into
Draft
Conversation
The premise:
∀O. is_lossless O => is_lossless A(O) (1)
of the current up-to-bad tactics happens to be too restrictive in some
cases. At first glance, it seems that it would be possible to allow
another variant of the tactic that instead requires
is_lossless A(O_1) ∧ is_lossless A(O_2) (2)
(possibly as two differents subgoals), which can be proved in some
concrete instances of A, O_1, O_2, while (1) is not.
Simply introducing a variant of the tactic that replaces (1) with (2) is
not satisfactory and is not ensured to be sound.
This is because commit 6534f3d (yes,
some archeology was required) changed the premises of this tactic, which
implicitly changes the proof of soundness of the tactic.
In order to have a sound variant of the tactic, this PR provides a
way to use a different set of premises, which restores the original
conditions required for applying up-to-bad tactics, as well as changes
condition (1) with (2) (which is the original goal).
Some issues still need to be addressed w.r.t. parsing. Introducing a
variant syntax in the spirit of `call @[weaker_pre]` causes shift/reduce
conflicts.
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
2 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
The premise:
of the current up-to-bad tactics happens to be too restrictive in some cases. At first glance, it seems that it would be possible to allow another variant of the tactic that instead requires
(possibly as two differents subgoals), which can be proved in some concrete instances of A, O_1, O_2, while (1) is not.
Simply introducing a variant of the tactic that replaces (1) with (2) is not satisfactory and is not ensured to be sound.
This is because commit 6534f3d (yes, some archeology was required) changed the premises of this tactic, which implicitly changes the proof of soundness of the tactic.
In order to have a sound variant of the tactic, this PR provides a way to use a different set of premises, which restores the original conditions required for applying up-to-bad tactics, as well as changes condition (1) with (2) (which is the original goal).
Some issues still need to be addressed w.r.t. parsing. Introducing a variant syntax in the spirit of
call @[weaker_pre]causes shift/reduce conflicts.