Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

coq-club - Re: [Coq-Club] aren't (x = n -> y = n) and (x = y) the same thing?

coq-club AT inria.fr

Subject: The Coq mailing list

List archive

Re: [Coq-Club] aren't (x = n -> y = n) and (x = y) the same thing?


Chronological Thread 
  • From: Cody Roux <cody.roux AT andrew.cmu.edu>
  • To: coq-club AT inria.fr
  • Subject: Re: [Coq-Club] aren't (x = n -> y = n) and (x = y) the same thing?
  • Date: Wed, 11 Jun 2014 10:26:10 -0400

Hi Bruno!

This happens all the time when proving inductive properties about say, programing language semantics. I think Cedric gave a nice example, but almost every lemma and theorem up to

forall n m k, (n * m) * k = n * (m * k)

uses these kinds of generalizations. Try it in Coq!

Another classic example is:

rev (rev l) = l

where rev is the reverse function on lists. It's also a nice case where an intermediary lemma is really required.

Best,

Cody


On 06/11/2014 01:42 AM, Bruno Woltzenlogel Paleo wrote:
Hi Cedric,

When you perform some induction, you sometimes need to generalize your goal.
This is interesting. Could you state a simple (if possible, "simplest")
example goal where this happens?

Thanks!
Best regards,

Bruno





Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.18.

Top of Page