coq-club AT inria.fr
Subject: The Coq mailing list
List archive
RE: [Coq-Club] Proof irrelevance for equalities - is there a trick without axioms?
Chronological Thread
- From: "Soegtrop, Michael" <michael.soegtrop AT intel.com>
- To: "coq-club AT inria.fr" <coq-club AT inria.fr>
- Subject: RE: [Coq-Club] Proof irrelevance for equalities - is there a trick without axioms?
- Date: Thu, 18 Aug 2016 08:01:09 +0000
- Accept-language: de-DE, en-US
- Authentication-results: mail2-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr; spf=None smtp.pra=michael.soegtrop AT intel.com; spf=Pass smtp.mailfrom=michael.soegtrop AT intel.com; spf=None smtp.helo=postmaster AT mga09.intel.com
- Ironport-phdr: 9a23:QwfjjB2YdrRXtOBxsmDT+DRfVm0co7zxezQtwd8ZsegfK/ad9pjvdHbS+e9qxAeQG96KsrQe0KGP6fyoGTRZp83Q6DZaKN0EfiRGoP1epxYnDs+BBB+zB9/RRAt+Iv5/UkR49WqwK0lfFZW2TVTTpnqv8WxaQU2nZkJLL+j4UrTfk96wn7jrvcaCOkMS33HkO+86bE3v616A7o9O2coqA51y4yOBmmFPdeVSyDEgDnOotDG42P2N+oV++T9bofMr+p0Ie6z7e6MlUe4QV2x+YChmrPHs4FPIShLK7X8BWE0XlABJCk7L9luyCpz2q27xsvd38CicJ8z/C74uD2eM9aBuHVXTjyoIKyQ+6CWfr817jKtWpFjp8xl+yI7dbYXTL/1zcb/HessyRGxdU8IXXCtEVNDvJ7ATBvYMaL4L57L2oEED+EOz
Dear Jason,
you are right, my usage of the wording “literal term” was sloppy. I don’t have a good definition of “literal term”, which would exclude Set::nil.
But I don’t think I understand what exactly you mean by “has decidable equality”. A declared instance of some type class? I didn’t find a type class for decidability of equality in the standard library, just the HasEqDec module type. Also I tried it with some trivial ad hoc inductive types, for which for sure no type classes or canonical instances are defined, and it did work.
Many thanks to all who helped to explain this, especially to John Wiegley who gave the first answer, but whom I forgot to acknowledge in my first response – sorry!
Best regards,
Michael
From: coq-club-request AT inria.fr [mailto:coq-club-request AT inria.fr]
On Behalf Of Jason Gross
It only works if the type has decidable equality. list nat has decidable equality. It is also decidable whether or not a list of any type is nil, or not. If you instead try (feq : Set::nil = Set::nil -> T), you will find that it does not work. If you try (feq : Set = Set -> T) it will not work. If you try (feq : list nat = list nat -> T), it will not work. If you try (feq : S = S -> T) it will not work. If you try (feq : eq_refl 0 = eq_refl 0 -> T), it may or may not work (this still has decidable equality, but it is more complicated).
Intel Deutschland GmbH |
- Re: [Coq-Club] Proof irrelevance for equalities - is there a trick without axioms?, (continued)
- Re: [Coq-Club] Proof irrelevance for equalities - is there a trick without axioms?, Jonathan Leivent, 08/17/2016
- RE: [Coq-Club] Proof irrelevance for equalities - is there a trick without axioms?, Soegtrop, Michael, 08/17/2016
- Re: [Coq-Club] Proof irrelevance for equalities - is there a trick without axioms?, Jason Gross, 08/17/2016
- Re: [Coq-Club] Proof irrelevance for equalities - is there a trick without axioms?, Jean-Marie Madiot, 08/17/2016
- Re: [Coq-Club] Proof irrelevance for equalities - is there a trick without axioms?, Hugo Herbelin, 08/17/2016
- Re: [Coq-Club] Proof irrelevance for equalities - is there a trick without axioms?, Jason Gross, 08/18/2016
- Re: [Coq-Club] Proof irrelevance for equalities - is there a trick without axioms?, Jonathan Leivent, 08/18/2016
- Re: [Coq-Club] Proof irrelevance for equalities - is there a trick without axioms?, Jason Gross, 08/18/2016
- Re: [Coq-Club] Proof irrelevance for equalities - is there a trick without axioms?, Jean-Marie Madiot, 08/17/2016
- Re: [Coq-Club] Proof irrelevance for equalities - is there a trick without axioms?, Maxime Dénès, 08/18/2016
- Re: [Coq-Club] Proof irrelevance for equalities - is there a trick without axioms?, Hugo Herbelin, 08/18/2016
- Re: [Coq-Club] Proof irrelevance for equalities - is there a trick without axioms?, Jason Gross, 08/17/2016
- Re: [Coq-Club] Proof irrelevance for equalities - is there a trick without axioms?, Amin Timany, 08/18/2016
- RE: [Coq-Club] Proof irrelevance for equalities - is there a trick without axioms?, Soegtrop, Michael, 08/18/2016
- Re: [Coq-Club] Proof irrelevance for equalities - is there a trick without axioms?, Guillaume Melquiond, 08/18/2016
- RE: [Coq-Club] Proof irrelevance for equalities - is there a trick without axioms?, Soegtrop, Michael, 08/18/2016
- Re: [Coq-Club] Proof irrelevance for equalities - is there a trick without axioms?, Jonathan Leivent, 08/18/2016
- Re: [Coq-Club] Proof irrelevance for equalities - is there a trick without axioms?, Pierre Courtieu, 08/18/2016
- RE: [Coq-Club] Proof irrelevance for equalities - is there a trick without axioms?, Soegtrop, Michael, 08/18/2016
- Re: [Coq-Club] Proof irrelevance for equalities - is there a trick without axioms?, Jason Gross, 08/18/2016
Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.18.