Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

coq-club - Re: [Coq-Club] [Agda] Re: [HoTT] newbie questions about homotopy theory & advantage of UF/Coq

coq-club AT inria.fr

Subject: The Coq mailing list

List archive

Re: [Coq-Club] [Agda] Re: [HoTT] newbie questions about homotopy theory & advantage of UF/Coq


Chronological Thread 
  • From: Maxime Dénès <mail AT maximedenes.fr>
  • To: Altenkirch Thorsten <psztxa AT exmail.nottingham.ac.uk>, "cody.roux AT andrew.cmu.edu" <cody.roux AT andrew.cmu.edu>, "homotopytypetheory AT googlegroups.com" <homotopytypetheory AT googlegroups.com>
  • Cc: coq-club Club <coq-club AT inria.fr>, "agda AT lists.chalmers.se" <agda AT lists.chalmers.se>
  • Subject: Re: [Coq-Club] [Agda] Re: [HoTT] newbie questions about homotopy theory & advantage of UF/Coq
  • Date: Mon, 06 Jan 2014 15:42:30 -0500

Bingo, Agda seems to have the same problem:

module Termination where

open import Relation.Binary.Core

data Empty : Set where

data Box : Set where
wrap : (Empty → Box) → Box

postulate
iso : (Empty → Box) ≡ Box

loop : Box -> Empty
loop (wrap x) rewrite iso = loop x

gift : Empty → Box
gift ()

bug : Empty
bug = loop (wrap gift)

However, I may be missing something due to my ignorance of Agda. It may be well known that the axiom I introduced is inconsistent. Forgive me if it is the case.

Maxime.

On 01/06/2014 01:15 PM, Maxime Dénès wrote:
The anti-extensionality bug is indeed related to termination. More precisely, it is the subterm relation used by the guard checker which is not defined quite the right way on dependent pattern matching.

It is not too hard to fix (we have a patch), but doing so without ruling out any interesting legitimate example (dealing with recursion on dependently typed data structures) is more challenging.

I am also curious as to whether Agda is impacted. Let's try it :)

Maxime.

On 01/06/2014 12:59 PM, Altenkirch Thorsten wrote:
Which bug was this?

I only saw the one which allowed you to prove anti-extensionality? But
this wasn't related to termination, or?

Thorsten

On 06/01/2014 16:54, "Cody Roux"
<cody.roux AT andrew.cmu.edu>
wrote:

Nice summary!


On 01/06/2014 08:49 AM, Altenkirch Thorsten wrote:
Agda enforces termination via a termination checker which is more
flexible but I think less principled than Coq's approach.
That's a bit scary given that there was an inconsistency found in
the Coq termination checker just a couple of weeks ago :)

BTW, has anyone tried reproducing the bug in Agda?


Cody
This message and any attachment are intended solely for the addressee and may contain confidential information. If you have received this message in error, please send it back to me, and immediately delete it. Please do not use, copy or disclose the information contained in this message or in any attachment. Any views or opinions expressed by the author of this email do not necessarily reflect the views of the University of Nottingham.

This message has been checked for viruses but the contents of an attachment
may still contain software viruses which could damage your computer system, you are advised to perform your own checks. Email communications with the University of Nottingham may be monitored as permitted by UK legislation.





_______________________________________________
Agda mailing list
Agda AT lists.chalmers.se
https://lists.chalmers.se/mailman/listinfo/agda




Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.18.

Top of Page