Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

coq-club - [Coq-Club] Is there a tactic to do this in a convenient way?

coq-club AT inria.fr

Subject: The Coq mailing list

List archive

[Coq-Club] Is there a tactic to do this in a convenient way?


Chronological Thread 
  • From: Chris Dams <chris.dams.nl AT gmail.com>
  • To: coq-club <coq-club AT inria.fr>
  • Subject: [Coq-Club] Is there a tactic to do this in a convenient way?
  • Date: Sat, 12 Nov 2016 16:42:38 +0100
  • Authentication-results: mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr; spf=None smtp.pra=chris.dams.nl AT gmail.com; spf=Pass smtp.mailfrom=chris.dams.nl AT gmail.com; spf=None smtp.helo=postmaster AT mail-it0-f47.google.com
  • Ironport-phdr: 9a23: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

Dear all,

In a proof I have a long and complicated term (let us call it long_and_complicated_term) that is of a type that is of the form A -> B -> C where all of A, B, and C are also long and complicated. Because these terms are long and complicated I do not want to cut and paste them into my proof script. I don't mind having long_and_complicated_term in my proof script because it cannot really be avoided but I do want to have it only once. I would like to have a tactic that adds C as hypothesis and generates A and B as goals of the proof and then allows me to continue with the proof of the actual goal with C now a hypothesis that can be used. If A, B, and C were not so long and complicated I would have done 'assert (H: C)' and 'apply long_and_complicated_term' and be happily on my way. If C actually were of the form (D /\ E) it would also have been pretty simple. I would have done 'destruct long_and_complicated_term as [H1 H2]' because that actually generates A and B as proof obligations. I am not aware of a tactic that makes this convenient. What I am looking for is kind of a combination of pose and refine. Is it possible?

Many thanks!
Chris



Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.18.

Top of Page