coq-club AT inria.fr
Subject: The Coq mailing list
List archive
- From: Edsko de Vries <devriese AT cs.tcd.ie>
- To: Matej Kosik <kosik AT fiit.stuba.sk>
- Cc: coq-club AT pauillac.inria.fr
- Subject: Re: [Coq-Club] A question concerning certain variant of the Prod rule
- Date: Wed, 15 Apr 2009 12:45:49 +0100
- List-archive: <http://pauillac.inria.fr/pipermail/coq-club/>
On 15 Apr 2009, at 11:35, Matej Kosik wrote:
or perhaps the special case were
`a' does not occur free in `B':
E,Γ |- A:Prop E,Γ |- B:Set
----------------------------------
E,Γ |- A->B:Set
Is it possible to give some meaningful examples of terms that can be
constructed this way?
Such functions are valid only in special cases; in particular, it is possible to use a proof as argument to a function that returns an argument in Set if the proof is used *only* to guard termination of the function, but cannot otherwise influence the value returned. If you are working through Coq'Art, you'll get to such functions eventually: Sections 14.2.3 and 15.2.
Edsko
- [Coq-Club] A question concerning certain variant of the Prod rule, Matej Kosik
- Re: [Coq-Club] A question concerning certain variant of the Prod rule,
Edsko de Vries
- Re: [Coq-Club] A question concerning certain variant of the Prod rule, Frederic Blanqui
- Re: [Coq-Club] A question concerning certain variant of the Prod rule, Edsko de Vries
- Re: [Coq-Club] A question concerning certain variant of the Prod rule, Cody Roux
- RE: [Coq-Club] A question concerning certain variant of the Prod rule, Kouskoulas, Yanni A.
- Re: [Coq-Club] A question concerning certain variant of the Prod rule, Yves Bertot
- Re: [Coq-Club] A question concerning certain variant of the Prod rule,
Edsko de Vries
Archive powered by MhonArc 2.6.16.