Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

coq-club - Re: [Coq-Club] working on functions -- how to solve this?

coq-club AT inria.fr

Subject: The Coq mailing list

List archive

Re: [Coq-Club] working on functions -- how to solve this?


Chronological Thread 
  • From: Robbert Krebbers <mailinglists AT robbertkrebbers.nl>
  • To: coq-club AT inria.fr
  • Cc: Ömer Sinan Ağacan <omeragacan AT gmail.com>
  • Subject: Re: [Coq-Club] working on functions -- how to solve this?
  • Date: Thu, 13 Feb 2014 08:52:32 +0100

Fixpoints only reduce if the structural argument is a constructor. In your example that was not the case (hence Jason's suggestion to perform a [destruct n']). However, since your definition of [closed] is non-recursive, a better solution is to declare it using [Definition], so this restriction on reductions does not apply.

On 02/13/2014 08:38 AM, Ömer Sinan Ağacan wrote:
Thank you Jason. Using Definition instead of Fixpoint worked. I don't
understand the problem, though. Can anyone explain me what's wrong
with using Fixpoint here?

---
Ömer Sinan Ağacan
http://osa1.net


2014-02-13 1:12 GMT+02:00 Jason Gross
<jasongross9 AT gmail.com>:
Use [Definition] for [closed] rather than [Fixpoint]. Alternatively, use
[destruct n'; simpl in *].

-Jason


On Wed, Feb 12, 2014 at 4:46 PM, Ömer Sinan Ağacan
<omeragacan AT gmail.com>
wrote:

Hi all,

I'm stuck with this:


H3 : (fix closed (n : nat) (t : tm) {struct n} : Prop :=
fvs n t = empty_set id) n' e'
==========================================
fvs n' e' = empty_set id


Any ideas how to prove this?

Thanks ..

---
Ömer Sinan Ağacan
http://osa1.net





Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.18.

Top of Page