Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

coq-club - Re: [Coq-Club] unfold definition on vectors

coq-club AT inria.fr

Subject: The Coq mailing list

List archive

Re: [Coq-Club] unfold definition on vectors


chronological Thread 
  • From: Adam Chlipala <adamc AT csail.mit.edu>
  • To: AUGER Cédric <Cedric.Auger AT lri.fr>
  • Cc: coq-club AT inria.fr
  • Subject: Re: [Coq-Club] unfold definition on vectors
  • Date: Mon, 19 Dec 2011 10:16:50 -0500

AUGER Cédric wrote:
Le Mon, 19 Dec 2011 09:20:02 -0500,
Adam 
Chlipala<adamc AT csail.mit.edu>
  a écrit :
My advice is this: never write program code with tactics (e.g., as
you're doing for [add] here).  Many people on this list will disagree
with that advice, but I believe tactics are a proper fit for "proofs"
only.  For an introduction to the techniques you'll need to avoid
using tactics to define [add] and similar functions, see CPDT:
      http://adam.chlipala.net/cpdt/

Adam, does the refine tactic falls in the "never write program code
with tactics"?

No, that pattern is consistent with what I meant. I wasn't fully precise, but my suggestion was to write all executable code explicitly, which is completely compatible with passing that code as the argument to [refine].



Archive powered by MhonArc 2.6.16.

Top of Page