this makes the ugly `fst`/`snd` variable names in the functional
induction principles go away.
Ironically I thought in order to fix these name, I should touch the
mutual/n-ary argument packing code used for well-founded recursion, and
embarked on a big refactor/rewrite of that code, only to find that at
least this particular instance of the issue was somewhere else. Hence
breaking this into its own PR; the refactoring will follow (and will
also improve some other variable names.)
closes#3022
With this commit, given the declaration
```
def foo : Nat → Nat
| 0 => 2
| n + 1 => foo n
```
when we unfold `foo (n+1)`, we now obtain `foo n` instead of `foo
(Nat.add n 0)`.
This adds the concept of **functional induction** to lean.
Derived from the definition of a (possibly mutually) recursive function,
a **functional
induction principle** is tailored to proofs about that function. For
example from:
```
def ackermann : Nat → Nat → Nat
| 0, m => m + 1
| n+1, 0 => ackermann n 1
| n+1, m+1 => ackermann n (ackermann (n + 1) m)
derive_functional_induction ackermann
```
we get
```
ackermann.induct (motive : Nat → Nat → Prop) (case1 : ∀ (m : Nat), motive 0 m)
(case2 : ∀ (n : Nat), motive n 1 → motive (Nat.succ n) 0)
(case3 : ∀ (n m : Nat), motive (n + 1) m → motive n (ackermann (n + 1) m) → motive (Nat.succ n) (Nat.succ m))
(x x : Nat) : motive x x
```
At the moment, the user has to ask for the functional induction
principle explicitly using
```
derive_functional_induction ackermann
```
The module docstring of `Lean/Meta/Tactic/FunInd.lean` contains more
details on the
design and implementation of this command.
More convenience around this (e.g. a `functional induction` tactic) will
follow eventually.
This PR includes a bunch of `PSum`/`PSigma` related functions in the
`Lean.Tactic.FunInd`
namespace. I plan to move these to `PackArgs`/`PackMutual` afterwards,
and do some cleaning
up as I do that.
---------
Co-authored-by: David Thrane Christiansen <david@davidchristiansen.dk>
Co-authored-by: Leonardo de Moura <leomoura@amazon.com>
This adds a number of lemmas for simplification of `Bool` and `Prop`
terms. It pulls lemmas from Mathlib and adds additional lemmas where
confluence or consistency suggested they are needed.
It has been tested against Mathlib using some automated test
infrastructure.
That testing module is not yet included in this PR, but will be included
as part of this.
Note. There are currently some comments saying the origin of the simp
rule. These will be removed prior to merging, but are added to clarify
where the rule came from during review.
---------
Co-authored-by: Scott Morrison <scott.morrison@gmail.com>
We use `let_delayed` to elaborate `match_expr` join points, which
elaborate the body of the `let` before its value. Thus, there is a
difference between:
- `let_delayed f (x : Expr) := <val>; <body>`
- `let_delayed f := fun (x : Expr) => <val>; <body>`
In the latter, when `<body>` is elaborated, the elaborator does not know
that `f` takes an argument of type `Expr`, and that `f` is a function.
Before this commit ensures the former representation is used.
Else the `case` will now allow introducing all necessary variables.
Induction principles with `let` in the types of the cases will be more
common with #3432.
This implementation no longer reduces the type as it goes, but really
only counts
manifest foralls and lets. I find this more sensible and predictable: If
you have
```
theorem induction₂_symm {P : EReal → EReal → Prop} (symm : Symmetric P) …
```
then previously, writing
```
case symm =>
```
would actually bring a fresh `x` and `y` and variable `h : P x y` into
scope and produce a
goal of `P y x`, because `Symmetric P` happens to be
```
def Symmetric := ∀ ⦃x y⦄, x ≺ y → y ≺ x
```
After this change, after `case symm =>` will leave `Symmetric P` as the
goal.
This gives more control to the author of the induction hypothesis about
the actual
goal of the cases. This shows up in mathlib in two places; fixes in
https://github.com/leanprover-community/mathlib4/pull/11023.
I consider these improvements.
the user can now write `termination_by?` to see the termination argument
inferred by GuessLex, and turn it into `termination_by …` using the “Try
this” widget or a code action.
To be done later, maybe: Avoid writing `sizeOf` if it's not necessary.
When using `set_option tactic.skipAssignedInstances false`, `simp` and
`rw` will synthesize instance implicit arguments even if they have
assigned by unification. If the synthesized argument does not match the
assigned one the rewrite is not performed. This option has been added
for backward compatibility.
```
example (a : Nat) :
(((a + (2 ^ 64 - 1)) % 2 ^ 64 + 1) * 8 - 1 - (a + (2 ^ 64 - 1)) % 2 ^ 64 * 8 + 1) = 8 := by
omega
```
used to time out, and now is fast.
(We will probably make separate changes later so the defeq checks would
be fast in any case here.)
The `decide` tactic produces error messages that users find to be
obscure. Now:
1. If the `Decidable` instance reduces to `isFalse`, it reports that
`decide` failed because the proposition is false.
2. If the `Decidable` instance fails to reduce, it explains what
proposition it failed for, and it shows the reduced `Decidable` instance
rather than the `Decidable.decide` expression. That expression tends to
be less useful since it shows the unreduced `Decidable` argument (plus
it's a lot longer!)
Examples:
```lean
example : 1 ≠ 1 := by decide
/-
tactic 'decide' proved that the proposition
1 ≠ 1
is false
-/
opaque unknownProp : Prop
open scoped Classical in
example : unknownProp := by decide
/-
tactic 'decide' failed for proposition
unknownProp
since its 'Decidable' instance reduced to
Classical.choice ⋯
rather than to the 'isTrue' constructor.
-/
```
When reporting the error, `decide` only shows the whnf of the
`Decidable` instance. In the future we could consider having it reduce
all decidable instances present in the term, which can help with
determining the cause of failure (this was explored in
8cede580690faa5ce18683f168838b08b372bacb).
The elaboration function `Lean.Meta.coerceMonadLift?` inserts these
coercion helper functions into a term and tries to unfolded them with
`expandCoe`, but because that function only unfolds up to
reducible-and-instance transparency, these functions were not being
unfolded. The fix here is to give them the `@[reducible]` attribute.
with this, more functions will be proven terminating automatically,
namely those where after `simp_wf`, lexicographic order handling,
possibly `subst_vars` the remaining goal can be solved by `omega`.
Note that `simp_wf` already does simplification of the goal, so
this adds `omega`, not `(try simp) <;> omega` here.
There are certainly cases where `(try simp) <;> omega` will solve more
goals (e.g. due to the `subst_vars` in `decreasing_with`), and
`(try simp at *) <;> omega` even more. This PR errs on the side of
taking
smaller steps.
Just appending `<;> omega` to the existing
`simp (config := { arith := true, failIfUnchanged := false })` call
doesn’t work nicely, as that leaves forms like `Nat.sub` in the goal
that
`omega` does not seem to recognize.
This does *not* remove any of the existing ad-hoc `decreasing_trivial`
rules based on `apply` and `assumption`, to not regress over the status
quo (these rules may apply in cases where `omega` wouldn't “see”
everything, but `apply` due to defeq works).
Additionally, just extending makes bootstrapping easier; early in `Init`
where
`omega` does not work yet these other tactics can still be used.
(Using a single `omega`-based tactic was tried in #3478 but isn’t quite
possible yet, and will be postponed until we have better automation
including forward reasoning.)
with this, hopefully more obvious array accesses will be handled
automatically.
Just like #3503, this PR does not investiate which of the exitsting
tactics in `get_elem_tactic_trivial` are subsumed now and could be
dropped without (too much) breakage.
Before, app unexpanders would only be applied to entire applications.
However, some notations produce functions, and these functions can be
given additional arguments. The solution so far has been to write app
unexpanders so that they can take an arbitrary number of additional
arguments. However, as reported in [this Zulip
thread](https://leanprover.zulipchat.com/#narrow/stream/270676-lean4/topic/pretty.20printer.20bug/near/420662236),
this leads to misleading hover information in the Infoview. For example,
while `HAdd.hAdd f g 1` pretty prints as `(f + g) 1`, hovering over `f +
g` shows `f`. There is no way to fix the situation from within an app
unexpander; the expression position for `HAdd.hAdd f g` is absent, and
app unexpanders cannot register TermInfo.
This commit changes the app delaborator to try running app unexpanders
on every prefix of an application, from longest to shortest prefix. For
efficiency, it is careful to only try this when app delaborators do in
fact exist for the head constant, and it also ensures arguments are only
delaborated once. Then, in `(f + g) 1`, the `f + g` gets TermInfo
registered for that subexpression, making it properly hoverable.
The app delaborator is also refactored, and there are some bug fixes:
- app unexpanders only run when `pp.explicit` is false
- trailing parameters in under-applied applications are now only
considered up to reducible & instance transparency, which lets, for
example, optional arguments for `IO`-valued functions to be omitted.
(`IO` is a reader monad, so it's hiding a pi type)
- app unexpanders will no longer run for delaborators that use
`withOverApp`
- auto parameters now always pretty print, since we are not verifying
that the provided argument equals the result of evaluating the tactic
Furthermore, the `notation` command has been modified to generate an app
unexpander that relies on the app delaborator's new behavior.
The change to app unexpanders is reverse-compatible, but it's
recommended to update `@[app_unexpander]`s in downstream projects so
that they no longer handle overapplication themselves.
