Following up #5928, updates the syntax for `omega` and `solve_by_elim`
and restores the syntax quotations in their implementations.
Following up #5898, uses the new tactic syntax in the library, replacing
all uses of `(config := ...)`.
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.
This PR simplifies the signature of `Array.mapIdx`, to take a function
`f : Nat \to \a \to \b` rather than a function `f : Fin as.size \to \a
\to \b`.
Lean doesn't actually use the extra generality anywhere (so in fact this
change *simplifies* all the call sites of `Array.mapIdx`, since we no
longer need to throw away the proof).
This change would make the function signature equivalent to
`List.mapIdx`, hence making it easier to write verification lemmas.
We keep the original behaviour as `Array.mapFinIdx`.
I made a few choices so far that can probably be discussed:
- got rid of `modn` on `UInt`, nobody seems to use it apart from the
definition of `shift` which can use normal `mod`
- removed the previous defeq optimized definition of `USize.size` in
favor for a normal one. The motivation was to allow `OfNat` to work
which doesn't seem to be necessary anymore afaict.
- Minimized uses of `.val`, should we maybe mark it deprecated?
- Mostly got rid of `.val` in basically all theorems as the proper next
level of API would now be `.toBitVec`. We could probably re-prove them
but it would be more annoying given the change of definition.
- Did not yet redefine `log2` in terms of `BitVec` as this would require
a `log2` in `BitVec` as well, do we want this?
- I added a couple of theorems around the relation of `<` on `UInt` and
`Nat`. These were previously not needed because defeq was used all over
the place to save us. I did not yet generalize these to all types as I
wasn't sure if they are the appropriate lemma that we want to have.
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)
Just an `Array` version of `List.eraseReps`. These functions are for now
outside of scope for verification, so there's just a simple `example` in
the tests.
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.
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`.
