coq-club AT inria.fr
Subject: The Coq mailing list
List archive
- From: Cedric Auger <Cedric.Auger AT lri.fr>
- Cc: coq-club AT pauillac.inria.fr
- Subject: [Coq-Club] Canonical Structures Not at top level
- Date: Fri, 31 Jul 2009 11:24:21 +0200
- List-archive: <http://pauillac.inria.fr/pipermail/coq-club/>
Hi all, I know the subject doesn't mean anything; it is more a (irrelevant?) feature request than a real question:
Is there any good reason to restrict the use of Canonical Structure to toplevel?
---
Record Foo :=
{ bar : Type;
foobar : bar -> Type;
barfoo : forall b, foobar b -> bool;
param1 : bar;
param2 : forall b, foobar b
}
Definition eval_foo f := f.(barfoo) (f.(param1)) (f.(param2) (f.(param1))).
---
I think it could be handy to define eval_foo as:
Definition eval_foo f :=
set f as canonical in
barfoo param1 (param2 param1).
--
Cédric AUGER
Univ Paris-Sud, Laboratoire LRI, UMR 8623, F-91405, Orsay
- [Coq-Club] Check Record Field Membership in a List, CoqUser CoqUser
- <Possible follow-ups>
- [Coq-Club] Check Record Field Membership in a List,
CoqUser CoqUser
- Re: [Coq-Club] Check Record Field Membership in a List,
Adam Koprowski
- [Coq-Club] Canonical Structures Not at top level, Cedric Auger
- Re: [Coq-Club] Check Record Field Membership in a List,
Adam Koprowski
- [Coq-Club] Check Record Field Membership in a List,
Coq User
- Message not available
Archive powered by MhonArc 2.6.16.