Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

coq-club - Re: [Coq-Club] Can an Ltac2 tactic modify a top-level Ltac2 array?

coq-club AT inria.fr

Subject: The Coq mailing list

List archive

Re: [Coq-Club] Can an Ltac2 tactic modify a top-level Ltac2 array?


Chronological Thread 
  • From: Pierre-Marie Pédrot <pierre-marie.pedrot AT inria.fr>
  • To: "jonikelee AT gmail.com" <jonikelee AT gmail.com>
  • Cc: coq-club AT inria.fr
  • Subject: Re: [Coq-Club] Can an Ltac2 tactic modify a top-level Ltac2 array?
  • Date: Wed, 6 Jan 2021 17:49:34 +0100

On 06/01/2021 17:45, jonikelee AT gmail.com wrote:
> Why not provide both? They're both very useful for different purposes.
> Introduce the keyword "special" to distinguish when the binding is
> dynamic.

State is more expressive than reader, since you can implement the latter
with the former. So the question is rather if we want to give the full
power of state in the rebinding of global definitions. Typically,
limiting expressivity can be worthwhile for code modularity.

PMP

Attachment: OpenPGP_signature
Description: OpenPGP digital signature




Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.19+.

Top of Page