coq-club AT inria.fr
Subject: The Coq mailing list
List archive
- From: Jean-Francois Monin <jeanfrancois.monin AT rd.francetelecom.com>
- To: Pierre Courtieu <Pierre.Courtieu AT sophia.inria.fr>
- Cc: Jean-Francois Monin <jeanfrancois.monin AT rd.francetelecom.com>, coq-club AT pauillac.inria.fr
- Subject: Re: [Coq-Club] relevance of evaluating accessibility arguments
- Date: Mon, 18 Nov 2002 14:12:53 +0100
- List-archive: <http://pauillac.inria.fr/pipermail/coq-club/>
Beware: my problem is not in the definition of the fixpoint
but in its use.
JF
Pierre Courtieu a ecrit :
>
> Hello,
>
> If you allow to reduce Fixpoint when the decreasing argument is not a
> head-constructor term, then you will generally be able to do it
> infinetely.
>
> My (short) experience is that if it is a limitation then I chose the
> wrong decreasing argument. Typically when the first Case in the
> fixpoint is not on the decreasing argument:
>
> Fixpoint f [x:A; a:(accessible x)] : B :=
> Cases x of
> | ... => b
> | ... =>
> Cases a of
> | recursive calls
> |
>
> However in some rare cases there is no other choice for the decreasing
> argument, and then it would be nice to be able to force (by rewrite?)
> one step of beta-reduction inside a fixpoint. Using "Case a" to be
> able to reduce is annoying, is there another way?
>
> Pierre
>
> Jean-Francois Monin
> <jeanfrancois.monin AT rd.francetelecom.com>
> wrote:
> > Hello,
> >
> > Consider the following context:
> >
> > A, B : Set.
> > Inductive accessible : A -> Prop := ...
> > Fixpoint f [x:A; a:(accessible x)] : B := ...
> >
> > Now, given a closed value x:A and a non canonical proof a:(accessible x),
> > I would expect that a lazy evaluation of (f x a) reduces to its normal
> > form without evaluating a.
> > But it does not seem to be the case. For example, if the following
> > is an opaque theorem:
> > Theorem all_acc : (x:A)(accessible x),
> > you can observe that (f x (all_acc x)) is not computed in Coq V3.1,
> > though the value of the second argument is not used the result
> > (only its existence is important).
> >
> > On the other hand, it works if a is not the decreasing argument
> > of the fixpoint f.
> >
> > What is happening ?
> >
> > Jean-Francois
> >
> > --------------------------------------------------------
> > Bug reports: http://coq.inria.fr/bin/coq-bugs
> > Archives: http://pauillac.inria.fr/pipermail/coq-club
> > http://pauillac.inria.fr/bin/wilma/coq-club
> > Info: http://pauillac.inria.fr/mailman/listinfo/coq-club
>
>
> --
> Pierre Courtieu
- [Coq-Club] relevance of evaluating accessibility arguments, Jean-Francois Monin
- Re: [Coq-Club] relevance of evaluating accessibility arguments,
Pierre Courtieu
- Re: [Coq-Club] relevance of evaluating accessibility arguments,
Randy Pollack
- lRe: [Coq-Club] relevance of evaluating accessibility arguments,
Eduardo Gimenez
- Re: [Coq-Club] relevance of evaluating accessibility arguments,
Jean-Francois Monin
- Message not available
- Re: [Coq-Club] relevance of evaluating accessibility arguments, Jean-Francois Monin
- Message not available
- Re: [Coq-Club] relevance of evaluating accessibility arguments,
Jean-Francois Monin
- lRe: [Coq-Club] relevance of evaluating accessibility arguments,
Eduardo Gimenez
- Re: [Coq-Club] relevance of evaluating accessibility arguments, Jean-Francois Monin
- Re: [Coq-Club] relevance of evaluating accessibility arguments,
Judicael Courant
- Re: [Coq-Club] relevance of evaluating accessibility arguments,
Jean-Francois Monin
- Re: [Coq-Club] relevance of evaluating accessibility arguments, Benjamin Werner
- Re: [Coq-Club] relevance of evaluating accessibility arguments,
Jean-Francois Monin
- Re: [Coq-Club] relevance of evaluating accessibility arguments,
Judicael Courant
- Re: [Coq-Club] relevance of evaluating accessibility arguments,
Randy Pollack
- Re: [Coq-Club] relevance of evaluating accessibility arguments,
Nicolas Magaud
- Re: [Coq-Club] relevance of evaluating accessibility arguments,
Venanzio Capretta
- Re: [Coq-Club] relevance of evaluating accessibility arguments, Jean-Francois Monin
- Re: [Coq-Club] relevance of evaluating accessibility arguments,
Venanzio Capretta
- Re: [Coq-Club] relevance of evaluating accessibility arguments,
Pierre Courtieu
Archive powered by MhonArc 2.6.16.