Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

coq-club - Re: [Coq-Club] Eta-conversion in Coq 8.4 -- is there any documentation?

coq-club AT inria.fr

Subject: The Coq mailing list

List archive

Re: [Coq-Club] Eta-conversion in Coq 8.4 -- is there any documentation?


chronological Thread 
  • From: Arnaud Spiwack <aspiwack AT lix.polytechnique.fr>
  • To: Francois Pottier <Francois.Pottier AT inria.fr>
  • Cc: coq-club AT inria.fr
  • Subject: Re: [Coq-Club] Eta-conversion in Coq 8.4 -- is there any documentation?
  • Date: Tue, 21 Feb 2012 11:50:56 +0100


For instance, does this mean
that the tactic "rewrite" can now be used under a lambda-abstraction? That
would be tremendously useful.

Nothing new under the sun on this part. You can rewrite under lambda abstraction as long as abstracting out the subterm under consideration doesn't affect the _expression_'s type. This, in particular excludes subterms with bound variables. (e.g. you won't be able to prove (fun x=>x)=(fun x=>tt). The bottom line is that eta-expansion at the level of conversion is weaker than propositional extensionality.

So, mostly, it makes unification more potent (which is not without pitfalls).


Arnaud



Archive powered by MhonArc 2.6.16.

Top of Page