Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

coq-club - Re: [Coq-Club] Why do we have "Prop < Set" ? Why not just "Prop ≤ Set" ?

coq-club AT inria.fr

Subject: The Coq mailing list

List archive

Re: [Coq-Club] Why do we have "Prop < Set" ? Why not just "Prop ≤ Set" ?


Chronological Thread 
  • From: Guillaume Melquiond <guillaume.melquiond AT inria.fr>
  • To: coq-club AT inria.fr
  • Subject: Re: [Coq-Club] Why do we have "Prop < Set" ? Why not just "Prop ≤ Set" ?
  • Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2017 22:27:20 +0100

On 18/01/2017 17:30, Matej Kosik wrote:
> My question is about weakening (not strengthening)
>
> Prop < Set
>
> to
>
> Prop <= Set

Théo already explained it, so I just want to stress the important part
of his answer. "Prop < Set" does not mean that Prop is of type Set, it
just means that Prop is smaller than Set. In other words, any type of
Prop is a type of Set (but the converse does not hold).

Best regards,

Guillaume



Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.18.

Top of Page