coq-club AT inria.fr
Subject: The Coq mailing list
List archive
- From: Jason Gross <jasongross9 AT gmail.com>
- To: coq-club <coq-club AT inria.fr>
- Subject: Re: [Coq-Club] Abort-ended test Goals vs. async proof processing
- Date: Thu, 28 Aug 2014 00:35:39 +0100
I don't know if anyone has responded to you, or if you resolved this, and sorry for the rather late reply, but this sounds like a bug you should report on the bug tracker, if the behavior still exists.
-Jason
On Aug 17, 2014 3:54 AM, "Jonathan" <jonikelee AT gmail.com> wrote:
I just noticed the following behavior: when using asynchronous proof processing, as in Coqide, a goal that ends in Abort won't fully process. As with:
Goal True.
idtac. (*or any one tactic that doesn't fail*)
fail. (*or any sequence of tactics that fails*)
Abort.
Instead of the above goal failing, asynchronous processing mode skips from the first tactic (idtac in this case - which is evaluated) directly to the Abort, seeming to ignore everything in between (it's left colored blue in Coqide, instead of green). No failure occurs.
I don't know if this is the desired behavior of Abort under asynchronous processing mode, but some users might not anticipate such skipping, and might be using Abort-ending goals as tests.
-- Jonathan
- [Coq-Club] Abort-ended test Goals vs. async proof processing, Jonathan, 08/17/2014
- Re: [Coq-Club] Abort-ended test Goals vs. async proof processing, Jason Gross, 08/28/2014
- Re: [Coq-Club] Abort-ended test Goals vs. async proof processing, Jonathan, 08/28/2014
- Re: [Coq-Club] Abort-ended test Goals vs. async proof processing, Jason Gross, 08/28/2014
Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.18.