This attribute, which was implemented in #3640, is applied to the
following structures: `Sigma`, `PSigma`, `PProd`, `And`, `Subtype`, and
`Fin`. These were given this attribute in Lean 3.
Before, the termination argument as inferred by `GuessLex` was passed
further
on as `Syntax`, to be elaborated later in `WF.Rel`.
This didn’t feel quite right anymore. In particular if we want to teach
`GuessLex` about guessing more complex termination arguments like
`xs.size -
i`, using `Expr` here is more natural.
So this introduces `TerminationArgument` based on an `Expr` to be used
here.
A side-effect of how the termination arguments are elaborated is that
the unused
variables linter will now look at `termination_by` variables, and that
parameters
past the colon are not even invisibly in scope, so `‹_›` will not find
them
See https://github.com/leanprover-community/mathlib4/pull/11370/files
for examples
of fixing these changes.
this makes `termination_by?` even slicker.
The heuristics is agressive in the non-mutual case (will omit `sizeOf`
if the argument is non-dependent and the `WellFoundedRelation` relation
is via `sizeOfWFRel`.
In the mutual case we'd also have to check the arguments, as they line
up in the termination argument, have the same types. I did not bother at
this point; in the mutual case we omit `sizeOf` only if the argument
type is `Nat`.
As a drive-by fix, `termination_by?` now also works on functions that
have only one plausible measure.
The elaborator is prone to duplicate terms, including recursive calls,
even if the user only wrote a single one. This duplication is wasteful
if we run the tactics on duplicated calls, and confusing in the output
of GuessLex. So prune the list of recursive calls, and remove those
where another call exists that has the same goal and context that is no
more specific.
before code like
def dup (a : Nat) (b : Nat := a) := a + b
def rec : Nat → Nat
| 0 => 1
| n+1 => dup (dup (dup (rec n)))
decreasing_by decreasing_tactic
would run the `decreasing_tactic` 8 tims, because the recursive call
`rec n` gets duplicate due to the default paramter. Similar effects can
be observed due to dependent types or tactics like `cases`.
This is wasteful, and is confusing to the user when they use
`decreasing_by` interactively. Therfore, we now go through the proof
obligations (MVars) and if solving one would imply solving another one,
we assign the mvars to each other accordingly.
This PR is a sibling of #3004.
