Commit graph

5 commits

Author SHA1 Message Date
Leonardo de Moura
e3578c2f36
fix: discrepancy theorem vs example (#4493)
When the type of an `example` is a proposition,
we should elaborate on them as we elaborate on theorems.
This is particularly important for examples that are often
used in educational material.

Recall that when elaborating theorem headers, we convert unassigned
universe metavariables into universe parameters. The motivation is
that the proof of a theorem should not influence its statement.
However, before this commit, this was not the case for examples when
their type was a proposition.
This discrepancy often confused users.

Additionally, we considered extending the above behavior to definitions
when
1- When their type is a proposition. However, it still caused disruption
in Mathlib.
2- When their type is provided. That is, we would keep the current
behavior only if `: <type>` was omitted. This would make the elaborator
for `def` much closer to the one for `theorem`, but it proved to be too
restrictive.
For example, the following instance in `Core.lean` would fail:
```
instance {α : Sort u} [Setoid α] : HasEquiv α :=
  ⟨Setoid.r⟩
```
and we would have to write instead:
```
instance {α : Sort u} [Setoid α] : HasEquiv.{u, 0} α :=
  ⟨Setoid.r⟩
```
There are other failures like this in the core, and we assume many more
in Mathlib.

closes #4398
closes #4482 Remark: PR #4482 implements option 1 above. We may consider
it again in the future.
2024-06-24 01:18:41 +00:00
Kim Morrison
3a457e6ad6
chore: use #guard_msgs in run tests (#4175)
Many of our tests in `tests/lean/run/` produce output from `#eval` (or
`#check`) statements, that is then ignored.

This PR tries to capture all the useful output using `#guard_msgs`. I've
only done a cursory check that the output is still sane --- there is a
chance that some "unchecked" tests have already accumulated regressions
and this just cements them!

In the other direction, I did identify two rotten tests:
* a minor one in `setStructInstNotation.lean`, where a comment says `Set
Nat`, but `#check` actually prints `?_`. Weird?
* `CompilerProbe.lean` is generating empty output, apparently indicating
that something is broken, but I don't know the signficance of this file.

In any case, I'll ask about these elsewhere.

(This started by noticing that a recent `grind` test file had an
untested `trace_state`, and then got carried away.)
2024-05-16 00:38:31 +00:00
Leonardo de Moura
36cc7c23b6 fix: fixes #1886 2022-11-28 06:50:44 -08:00
Leonardo de Moura
04b7924154 chore: fix tests 2021-09-16 10:29:38 -07:00
Leonardo de Moura
ad3b0b4a2c feat: nary generalize tactic
This commit also fixes a bug when using multiple targets with the
`induction` and `cases` tactics.
2021-08-30 16:31:39 -07:00