coq-club AT inria.fr
Subject: The Coq mailing list
List archive
- From: Gregory Malecha <gmalecha AT eecs.harvard.edu>
- To: Victor Porton <porton AT narod.ru>
- Cc: coq-club Club <coq-club AT inria.fr>
- Subject: Re: [Coq-Club] Implementing proof by duality. Is it possible at all in Coq?
- Date: Tue, 1 Jan 2013 19:25:19 -0500
Hi, Victor --
--
gregory malecha
An alternative would be to use ltac to implement the rewrites that you want and add an explicit guard to prevent the non-termination. Something like this:
Ltac rewrite_them :=
match goal with
| [ |- context [ ?X ?L ] ] =>
match L with
| dual _ => fail 1
| _ => rewrite ....
end
end.
On Tue, Jan 1, 2013 at 4:47 PM, Victor Porton <porton AT narod.ru> wrote:
I am studying Coq.
As far as I understand, the following cannot be done with Coq 8.4:
For example, let L is an instance variable denoting a lattice (in order theoretic sense).
Make a database of setoid equalities like:
A L<-> A' (dual L)
A' L <-> A (dual L)
forall A B: (meet L A B = (join (dual L) A B))
forall A B: (join L A B = (meet (dual L) A B))
etc.
(Here A, A' are some properties of lattices.)
Then create a tactic which could replace [A] with [dual A'], [meet X Y] with [dual (meet X Y)], in every subexpression.
(This is intended to match the resulting formula with a theorem about the lattice L, to finish the proof by duality.)
Here autorewrite could be used, but this would loop with (dual (dual .. A)).
So I see no way to do this effectively.
Am I wrong? Can be this done? Especially I see no way where store this database about duality, as auto and autorewrite databases are too specific and there seems be no other databases in Coq 8.4.
One more suggestion: Hint databases should be referable not only by ID but also by a reference to ID. This would allow for duality tactics e.g. for lattice and for categories share the same Ltac code.
Can we expect this in Cor 8.5? Or I again ask for a feature which is already implemented but I miss it?
--
Victor Porton - http://portonvictor.org
gregory malecha
- [Coq-Club] Implementing proof by duality. Is it possible at all in Coq?, Victor Porton, 01/01/2013
- Re: [Coq-Club] Implementing proof by duality. Is it possible at all in Coq?, Daniel Schepler, 01/01/2013
- Re: [Coq-Club] Implementing proof by duality. Is it possible at all in Coq?, Gregory Malecha, 01/02/2013
- Re: [Coq-Club] Implementing proof by duality. Is it possible at all in Coq?, Victor Porton, 01/02/2013
- Re: [Coq-Club] Implementing proof by duality. Is it possible at all in Coq?, Gabriel Scherer, 01/02/2013
- Re: [Coq-Club] Implementing proof by duality. Is it possible at all in Coq?, Victor Porton, 01/02/2013
- Re: [Coq-Club] Implementing proof by duality. Is it possible at all in Coq?, Gregory Malecha, 01/02/2013
- Re: [Coq-Club] Implementing proof by duality. Is it possible at all in Coq?, Victor Porton, 01/02/2013
- Re: [Coq-Club] Implementing proof by duality. Is it possible at all in Coq?, Gabriel Scherer, 01/02/2013
- Re: [Coq-Club] Implementing proof by duality. Is it possible at all in Coq?, Victor Porton, 01/02/2013
- Re: [Coq-Club] Implementing proof by duality. Is it possible at all in Coq?, Tom Prince, 01/03/2013
- Re: [Coq-Club] Implementing proof by duality. Is it possible at all in Coq?, Victor Porton, 01/03/2013
- Re: [Coq-Club] Implementing proof by duality. Is it possible at all in Coq?, Arnaud Spiwack, 01/04/2013
- Re: [Coq-Club] Implementing proof by duality. Is it possible at all in Coq?, Victor Porton, 01/03/2013
Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.18.