Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

coq-club - [Coq-Club] Why do section variables behave differently in a definition than its arguments with respect to tactics?

coq-club AT inria.fr

Subject: The Coq mailing list

List archive

[Coq-Club] Why do section variables behave differently in a definition than its arguments with respect to tactics?


Chronological Thread 
  • From: Jonathan <jonikelee AT gmail.com>
  • To: Coq Club <coq-club AT inria.fr>
  • Subject: [Coq-Club] Why do section variables behave differently in a definition than its arguments with respect to tactics?
  • Date: Tue, 24 Jun 2014 13:56:42 -0400

There are times when certain case analysis tactics can be used to replace the hypothesis they are used on. For instance, something like "induction H as [H ...]." This is convenient. However, I just noticed that it matters as to whether H is a local hypothesis in the definition, or if it is a section variable. As a section variable, this replacing via intro pattern does not work - but it does still work to do this the long way as "induction H as [H' ...]. clear H. rename H' into H."

Is this a bug or a feature? I only noticed it because it broke one of my tactics - but I can of course just use the clear/rename workaround. I am just curious why there might be any difference at all between the two case.

-- Jonathan




Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.18.

Top of Page