max/lean4-htt
1
0
Fork 0
Code Issues Pull requests Projects Releases Packages Wiki Activity Actions 2
21347 commits 1 branch 0 tags 5.3 GiB
Commit graph

74 commits

Author SHA1 Message Date
Leonardo de Moura
0911b9bc80 feat: add missing features to do notation parser 2020-09-30 06:51:25 -07:00
Leonardo de Moura
e10edde5cd feat: optional ; in terms 2020-09-28 17:10:59 -07:00
Leonardo de Moura
d4c1432574 fix: tacticSeqBracketed 2020-09-28 17:10:59 -07:00
Leonardo de Moura
f45fa34cba feat: optional ; at tacticSeq1Indented 2020-09-28 17:10:59 -07:00
Leonardo de Moura
7f9013e496 fix: seq1Unbox 2020-09-28 17:10:59 -07:00
Leonardo de Moura
85d8c4fa85 chore: add proper kind for tacticSeq1Indented 2020-09-28 17:10:59 -07:00
Leonardo de Moura
aa410283c6 fix: we don't want antiquotation for seq1 2020-09-28 17:10:59 -07:00
Leonardo de Moura
cb55ffae94 chore: add new tactic syntax kind 2020-09-28 17:10:58 -07:00
Leonardo de Moura
861fd11a57 chore: add tacticSeq node 
We use `$tac:tacticSeq` in many places, and we want them to match
the bracketed and indented cases.
 2020-09-28 17:10:58 -07:00
Leonardo de Moura
6f211d3449 chore: adjust tactic parser 2020-09-28 17:10:57 -07:00
Leonardo de Moura
93090baa82 chore: cleanup tactic syntax 2020-09-28 17:10:57 -07:00
Leonardo de Moura
08d54b6043 feat: add checkColGt at app 
@Kha Only one example broke :)
 2020-09-28 17:10:57 -07:00
Leonardo de Moura
6ddec22763 refactor: simplify withPosition combinator 
Add `checkColGt`
 2020-09-28 17:10:56 -07:00
Leonardo de Moura
2d8506b7c6 feat: add doElem parser category 2020-09-26 06:18:44 -07:00
Leonardo de Moura
dc9626ceab feat: try to improve weird error message 
@Kha Before this commit, we were producing the error "expected command" at the `let` token
```lean
check id let x := 1; x
```
The new error is "expected command, but found term; this error may be
due to parsing precedence levels, consider parenthesizing the term".

The example above looks artificial, but it will happen all the time as
users start to define their own notation.
 2020-09-21 18:29:01 -07:00
Sebastian Ullrich
68568e78d3 feat: formatter: use hard space after opening structure instance brace 2020-09-18 13:15:40 -07:00
Sebastian Ullrich
95007171a8 feat: formatter: group+indent binders and structure instance fields 2020-09-18 13:15:40 -07:00
Leonardo de Moura
d1c3ab3797 feat: many1Unbox and nodeSepBy1Unbox parser combinators 
@Kha I removed the dummy parenthesizer/formatter for `withResultOf`,
and add proper ones for `many1Unbox` and `nodeSepBy1Unbox`.
 2020-09-17 13:17:46 -07:00
Leonardo de Moura
2dafdec000 feat: use withResultOf combinator instead of unboxSingleton parameter 2020-09-17 12:12:12 -07:00
Sebastian Ullrich
fad4660135 feat: pretty print space between binders 2020-09-17 08:12:28 -07:00
Leonardo de Moura
c49ccda46a feat: add antiquotation for indentedNonEmptySeq 2020-09-14 14:57:38 -07:00
Leonardo de Moura
05e6a779ba fix: can't use maxPrec at by 
If `by` uses `maxPrec`, then `have A by B ...` is parsed as
`have (A by B) ...` :(

cc @Kha
 2020-09-14 14:57:14 -07:00
Leonardo de Moura
f95675dc22 feat: add have-by and show-by syntax 2020-09-14 14:25:35 -07:00
Leonardo de Moura
fc4ab139b5 feat: indented by 
@Kha This one is not as useful as the indented `do`. When writing
interactive proofs I like the error message at the `}` showing the
resulting tactic state. We can simulate it using a `skip` in the end of the sequence :)
We remove the `skip` when the proof is done. Note that, the last `;`
is usually not part of the `by`. Example:
```lean
theorem ex (x y z : Nat) : y = z → y = x → x = z :=
fun _ _ =>
  have x = y by apply Eq.symm; assumption; -- <<< the last `;` is part of the `have`
  Eq.trans this (by assumption)
```
 2020-09-14 14:20:02 -07:00
Leonardo de Moura
4c6a589e6c feat: indented do blocks 
@Kha it is soooooo much nicer :)
 2020-09-14 13:44:51 -07:00
Leonardo de Moura
151012cb39 feat: remove emptyc elaboration hack 
@Kha I removed the hack. We know get a nice error message.
 2020-09-11 14:41:44 -07:00
Leonardo de Moura
ba4fdce508 feat: expand helper macros 2020-09-10 14:25:07 -07:00
Leonardo de Moura
d77dc5efb8 feat: add helper syntax 2020-09-10 13:31:45 -07:00
Leonardo de Moura
232fe8cadd doc: document parser trick 2020-09-10 11:20:09 -07:00
Leonardo de Moura
20152c1192 chore: change by precedence 
@Kha it now uses the same precedence of `fun`.
The main motivation is to allow us to write `@by { ... }` instead of
`@(by { ... })`.

BTW, I am considering disabling implicit lambdas for `by ...` expressions.
It is automatically "intro"ducing the implicit variables without
giving an opportunity for users to pick their names.
 2020-09-10 11:17:42 -07:00
Leonardo de Moura
b24d1c2d90 feat: add .. syntax for pattern applications 2020-09-09 09:55:29 -07:00
Leonardo de Moura
7dc1b461fa chore: give a proper node to matchAlts 2020-09-04 18:42:09 -07:00
Leonardo de Moura
ef64e1c25a feat: fun+match macro 
Example:
```
fun
  | 0 => true
  | _ => false
```
 2020-09-04 16:23:01 -07:00
Leonardo de Moura
0883f96da0 chore: remove optional partial from 'let rec' 
It will inherit the parent declaration annotation.
 2020-09-02 17:02:22 -07:00
Leonardo de Moura
095e07d52d chore: letrec => let rec 
cc @Kha
 2020-09-01 13:27:41 -07:00
Leonardo de Moura
6f0e9452b2 chore: remove begin ... end syntax 
We should use `by { ... }` from now on.

cc @Kha
 2020-08-30 14:15:33 -07:00
Leonardo de Moura
0a0ca9f930 fix: funImplicitBinder 2020-08-30 08:10:58 -07:00
Leonardo de Moura
b4f938d859 chore: namedHole => syntheticHole 2020-08-30 08:04:15 -07:00
Leonardo de Moura
89e0fa1488 chore: allow ?_ 
Note that `?_` is not equivalent to `_`. Both do not have a name, but
`?_` is a synthetic metavariable which **cannot** be assigned by typing
constraints, and `_` is a regular metavariable.
We use `?_` to mark an anonymous hole that must be filled using tactics.

@Kha I will rename `namedHole` to `syntheticHole`
 2020-08-30 07:54:34 -07:00
Leonardo de Moura
825d9643cd feat: allow structure instances as fun binder without () 
The issue is that `{ x := ... }` was being parsed as an implicit
binder, and we were getting an error at `:=`.
 2020-08-30 07:35:41 -07:00
Leonardo de Moura
546c108497 chore: revise letrec syntax 2020-08-26 10:50:32 -07:00
Leonardo de Moura
effaf64a07 feat: allow user to specify attributes letrec declarations 2020-08-26 09:57:46 -07:00
Leonardo de Moura
6a83577703 feat: letrec syntax 2020-08-26 09:33:52 -07:00
Sebastian Ullrich
1840b4b1ff fix: pretty printer with new syntax 2020-08-19 09:56:23 -07:00
Sebastian Ullrich
6cbfe2359b chore: remove old syntax 2020-08-19 09:56:23 -07:00
Sebastian Ullrich
3091bd71e7 feat: unwrap basic token parsers 2020-08-19 09:56:23 -07:00
Sebastian Ullrich
d4952dc40b feat: use insideQuot parsers 2020-08-19 09:56:23 -07:00
Leonardo de Moura
1ba3925740 feat: new let-expression syntax 
see 0064f7d2b9
 2020-08-17 07:51:08 -07:00
Sebastian Ullrich
129b60022d refactor: use distinct syntax kinds for quotations 2020-08-14 17:18:09 +02:00
Sebastian Ullrich
46f5670ba3 chore: Lean.Parser.Parser ~> Lean.Parser.Basic 2020-08-13 18:44:13 +02:00