coq-club AT inria.fr
Subject: The Coq mailing list
List archive
- From: t x <txrev319 AT gmail.com>
- To: coq-club <coq-club AT inria.fr>
- Subject: [Coq-Club] "minimal" set of tactics
- Date: Sun, 6 Oct 2013 21:45:09 -0700
Hi,
Let $S$ be a "minimal" set of tactics, if (1) any proposition provable in Coq can be proved using only $S$ and (2) removing a tactic from $S$ makes (1) false.
My question: is "pattern at, apply, cbv, inversion, assert, f_equal, unfold, fold" enough?
For example:
replace _ with _ ==> assert( _ = _ ) + rewrite ...
rewrite ==> pattern at .... + f_equal
simpl ==> cbv ...
destruct ==> inversion
This leads me to believe that the above is sufficient. However, is it "minimal", or we can remove some more from it?
Thanks!
- [Coq-Club] "minimal" set of tactics, t x, 10/07/2013
- Re: [Coq-Club] "minimal" set of tactics, Jason Gross, 10/07/2013
- Re: [Coq-Club] "minimal" set of tactics, t x, 10/07/2013
- Re: [Coq-Club] "minimal" set of tactics, Kristopher Micinski, 10/07/2013
- Re: [Coq-Club] "minimal" set of tactics, t x, 10/07/2013
- Re: [Coq-Club] "minimal" set of tactics, Jason Gross, 10/07/2013
Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.18.