This PR changes the signature of `Array.swap`, so it takes `Nat`
arguments with tactic provided bounds checking. It also renames
`Array.swap!` to `Array.swapIfInBounds`.
This PR modifies the signature of the functions `Nat.fold`,
`Nat.foldRev`, `Nat.any`, `Nat.all`, so that the function is passed the
upper bound. This allows us to change runtime array bounds checks to
compile time checks in many places.
This PR replaces `Array.feraseIdx` and `Array.insertAt` with
`Array.eraseIdx` and `Array.insertIdx`, both of which take a `Nat`
argument and a tactic-provided proof that it is in bounds. We also have
`eraseIdxIfInBounds` and `insertIdxIfInBounds` which are noops if the
index is out of bounds. We also provide a `Fin` valued version of
`Array.findIdx?`. Together, these quite ergonomically improve the array
indexing safety at a number of places in the compiler/elaborator.
This PR modifies the order of arguments for higher-order `Array`
functions, preferring to put the `Array` last (besides positional
arguments with defaults). This is more consistent with the `List` API,
and is more flexible, as dot notation allows two different partially
applied versions.
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>
This PR changes the signature of `Array.set` to take a `Nat`, and a
tactic-provided bound, rather than a `Fin`.
Corresponding changes (but without the auto-param) for `Array.get` will
arrive shortly, after which I'll go more pervasively through the Array
API.
This PR relates the operations `findSomeM?`, `findM?`, `findSome?`, and
`find?` on `Array` with the corresponding operations on `List`, and also
provides simp lemmas for the `Array` operations `findSomeRevM?`,
`findRevM?`, `findSomeRev?`, `findRev?` (in terms of `reverse` and the
usual forward find operations).
I'd previously added an instance from `ForIn'` to `ForIn`, but this then
caused some non-defeq duplication. It seems fine to just remove the
concrete `ForIn` instances in cases where the `ForIn'` instance exists
too. We can even remove a number of type-specific lemmas in favour of
the general ones.
Generally works best to pick up the proofs by unification with the lhs.
pinging @hargoniX as this goes by, as it changes some proofs in
bv_decide (nothing interesting, just a bit simpler)
We make sure that we can pull `List.toArray` out through all operations
(well, for now "most" rather than "all"). As we also push `Array.toList`
inwards, this hopefully has the effect of them cancelling as they meet,
and `simp` naturally rewriting Array operations into List operations
wherever possible.
This is not at all complete yet.
