This PR adds the `binderNameHint` gadget. It can be used in rewrite and
simp rules to preserve a user-provided name where possible.
The expression `binderNameHint v binder e` defined to be `e`.
If it is used on the right-hand side of an equation that is applied by a
tactic like `rw` or `simp`,
and `v` is a local variable, and `binder` is an expression that (after
beta-reduction) is a binder
(so `fun w => …` or `∀ w, …`), then it will rename `v` to the name used
in the binder, and remove
the `binderNameHint`.
A typical use of this gadget would be as follows; the gadget ensures
that after rewriting, the local
variable is still `name`, and not `x`:
```
theorem all_eq_not_any_not (l : List α) (p : α → Bool) :
l.all p = !l.any fun x => binderNameHint x p (!p x) := sorry
example (names : List String) : names.all (fun name => "Waldo".isPrefixOf name) = true := by
rw [all_eq_not_any_not]
-- ⊢ (!names.any fun name => !"Waldo".isPrefixOf name) = true
```
This gadget is supported by `simp`, `dsimp` and `rw` in the
right-hand-side of an equation, but not
in hypotheses or by other tactics.
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.
Consider
```
import Std.Tactic.ShowTerm
opaque a : Nat
opaque b : Nat
axiom a_eq_b : a = b
opaque P : Nat → Prop
set_option pp.explicit true
-- Using rw
example (h : P b) : P a := by show_term rw [a_eq_b]; assumption
```
Before, a typical proof term for `rewrite` looked like this:
```
-- Using the proof term that rw produces
example (h : P b) : P a :=
@Eq.mpr (P a) (P b)
(@id (@Eq Prop (P a) (P b))
(@Eq.ndrec Nat a (fun _a => @Eq Prop (P a) (P _a))
(@Eq.refl Prop (P a)) b a_eq_b))
h
```
which is rather round-about, applying `ndrec` to `refl`. It would be
more direct to write
```
example (h : P b) : P a :=
@Eq.mpr (P a) (P b)
(@id (@Eq Prop (P a) (P b))
(@congrArg Nat Prop a b (fun _a => (P _a)) a_eq_b))
h
```
which this change does.
This makes proof terms smaller, causing mild general speed up throughout
the code; if the brenchmarks don’t lie the highlights are
* olean size -2.034 %
* lint wall-clock -3.401 %
* buildtactic execution s -10.462 %
H'T to @digama0 for advice and help.
NB: One might even expect the even simpler
```
-- Using the proof term that I would have expected
example (h : P b) : P a :=
@Eq.ndrec Nat b (fun _a => P _a) h a a_eq_b.symm
```
but that would require non-local changes to the source code, so one step
at a time.
