This PR changes the signature of `Array.get` to take a Nat and a proof,
rather than a `Fin`, for consistency with the rest of the (planned)
Array API. Note that because of bootstrapping issues we can't provide
`get_elem_tactic` as an autoparameter for the proof. As users will
mostly use the `xs[i]` notation provided by `GetElem`, this hopefully
isn't a problem.
We may restore `Fin` based versions, either here or downstream, as
needed, but they won't be the "main" functions.
---------
Co-authored-by: David Thrane Christiansen <david@davidchristiansen.dk>
Previously, it was not possible to use `decide` with most Array
functions (including `==`).
Later, we may replace some of these functions with defeqs that go via
the `List` operations, and use `csimp` lemmas for fast runtime
behaviour. In the meantime, this allows using `decide`.
This change
* moves `termination_by` and `decreasing_by` next to the function they
apply to
* simplify the syntax of `termination_by`
* apply the `decreasing_by` goal to all goals at once, for better
interactive use.
See the section in `RELEASES.md` for more details and migration advise.
This is a hard breaking change, requiring developers to touch every
`termination_by` in their code base. We decided to still do it as a
hard-breaking change, because supporting both old and new syntax at the
same time would be non-trivial, and not save that much. Moreover, this
requires changes to some metaprograms that developers might have
written, and supporting both syntaxes at the same time would make
_their_ migration harder.
We are considering removing `.` as an alternative for `·` in the
lambda dot notation (e.g., `(·+·)`).
Reasons:
- `.` is not a perfect replacement for `·` (e.g., `(·.insert ·)`)
- `.` is too overloaded: `(f.x)` and `(f .x)` and `(f . x)`. We want to keep the first two.
