Subject: Ssreflect Users Discussion List
List archive
- From: <>
- To:
- Subject: Re: RE: RE: wildcards insertion in the Specialising assumptions mechanism
- Date: Wed, 2 Jul 2008 13:14:13 +0200 (CEST)
> Obviously, you're not using Implicit Arguments; you REALLY should.
I have been avoiding using Implicit Arguments since I do not well-understand
when it succeeds or fails, (for instance it looked fragile about permutation
of arguments, which does not seem to change anything to me )
and since I do not like my tactics to fail
due to a reason that I do not understand;
it was another source of painful bugs,
i.e. to detect arguments that were not inferred.
It looks to me that ssr's inference engine is more robust,
so I thought I can try to rely on it. And if the same engine is available
for Implicit Arguments, I will try it too.
Thank you.
Best regards,
Keiko
- wildcards insertion in the Specialising assumptions mechanism, keiko.nakata, 07/01/2008
- RE: wildcards insertion in the Specialising assumptions mechanism, Georges Gonthier, 07/01/2008
- <Possible follow-up(s)>
- Re: RE: wildcards insertion in the Specialising assumptions mechanism, keiko.nakata, 07/02/2008
- RE: RE: wildcards insertion in the Specialising assumptions mechanism, Georges Gonthier, 07/02/2008
- Re: RE: RE: wildcards insertion in the Specialising assumptions mechanism, keiko.nakata, 07/02/2008
- RE: RE: RE: wildcards insertion in the Specialising assumptions mechanism, Georges Gonthier, 07/02/2008
- Re: wildcards insertion in the Specialising assumptions mechanism, keiko.nakata, 07/02/2008
- RE: wildcards insertion in the Specialising assumptions mechanism, Georges Gonthier, 07/02/2008
- Re: RE: wildcards insertion in the Specialising assumptions mechanism, keiko.nakata, 07/02/2008
Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.18.