after this change, `simp` will be able to discharge side-goals that,
after simplification, are of the form `∀ …, a = b` with `a =?= b`.
Usually these side-goals are solved by simplification using `eq_self`,
but that does not work when there are metavariables involved.
This enables us to have rewrite rules like
```
theorem List.foldl_subtype (p : α → Prop) (l : List (Subtype p)) (f : β → Subtype p → β)
(g : β → α → β) (b : β)
(hf : ∀ b x h, f b ⟨x, h⟩ = g b x) :
l.foldl f b = (l.map (·.val)).foldl g b := by
```
where the parameter `g` does not appear on the lhs, but can be solved
for using the `hf` equation. See `tests/lean/run/simpHigherOrder.lean`
for more examples.
The motivating use-case is that `simp` should be able to clean up the
usual
```
l.attach.map (fun <x, _> => x)
```
idiom often seen in well-founded recursive functions with nested
recursion.
Care needs to be taken with adding such rules to the default simp set if
the lhs is very general, and thus causes them to be tried everywhere.
Performance impact of just this PR (no additional simp rules) on mathlib
is unsuspicious:
http://speed.lean-fro.org/mathlib4/compare/b5bc44c7-e53c-4b6c-9184-bbfea54c4f80/to/ae1d769b-2ff2-4894-940c-042d5a698353
I tried a few alternatives, e.g. letting `simp` apply `eq_self` without
bumping the mvar depth, or just solve equalities directly, but that
broke too much things, and adding code to the default discharger seemed
simpler.
The formatter was using `tk ++ " "` to separate tokens from tokens they
would merge with, but `" "` is not whitespace that could merge. This
affected large binder lists, which wouldn't pretty print with any line
breaks. Now they can be flowed across multiple lines.
Closes#5424
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.
Now the elab-as-elim procedure allows eliminators whose result is an
arbitrary application of the motive. For example, the following is now
accepted. It will generalize `Int.natAbs _` from the expected type.
```lean
@[elab_as_elim]
theorem natAbs_elim {motive : Nat → Prop} (i : Int)
(hpos : ∀ (n : Nat), i = n → motive n)
(hneg : ∀ (n : Nat), i = -↑n → motive n) :
motive (Int.natAbs i) := by sorry
```
This change simplifies the elaborator, since it no longer needs to keep
track of discriminants (which can easily be read off from the return
type of the eliminator) or the difference between "targets" and "extra
arguments" (which are now both "major arguments" that should be eagerly
elaborated).
Closes#4086
`BitVec.Lemmas` contained a couple of non-terminal simps. We turn
non-terminal `simp$`, `simp [`, and `simp at` expressions into `simp
only` to improve code maintainability.
This was upstreamed from Mathlib in #5478, but leaving off the `@[simp]`
attribute, thereby breaking Mathlib. (We could of course add the simp
attribute back in Mathlib, but wherever it lives it should have been in
place at the time we merged -- this way I have to add it temporarily in
Mathlib and then remove it again once it is redundant.)
Recall that currently named arguments suppress all explicit parameters
that are dependencies. This PR limits this feature to only apply to true
structure projections, except in the case where it is triggered when
there are no more positional arguments. This preserves the primary
reason for generalizing this feature (issue #1851), while removing the
generalized feature, which has led to numerous confusions (issue #1867).
This also fixes a bug pointed out [on
Zulip](https://leanprover.zulipchat.com/#narrow/stream/270676-lean4/topic/.40foo.20.28A.20.3A.3D.20bar.29.20_.20_/near/468564862)
where in `@` mode, instance implicit parameter dependencies to named
arguments would be suppressed unless the next positional argument was
`_`.
More detail:
* The `NamedArg` structure now has a `suppressDeps : Bool` field. It is
set to `true` for the `self` argument in structure projections. If there
is such a `NamedArg`, explicit parameters that are dependencies to the
named argument are turned into implicit arguments. The consequence is
that *all* structure projections are treated as if their type parameters
are implicit, even for class projections. This flag is *not* used for
generalized field notation.
* We preserve the suppression feature when there are no positional
arguments remaining. This feature pre-dates the fix to issue #1851, and
it is useful when combining named arguments and the eta expansion
feature, since dependencies of named arguments cannot be turned into eta
arguments. Plus, there are examples of the form `rw [lem (h := foo)]`
where `lem` has explicit arguments that `h` depends on.
* For instance implicit parameters in explicit mode, now `_` arguments
register terminfo and are hoverable.
* Now `..` is respected in explicit mode.
This implements RFC #5397. The `suppressDeps` flag suggests a future
possibility of a named argument syntax that can suppress dependencies.
Adds a mechanism where when an autoparam tactic fails to synthesize a
parameter, the associated parameter name or field name for the autoparam
is reported in an error.
Examples:
```text
could not synthesize default value for parameter 'h' using tactics
could not synthesize default value for field 'inv' of 'S' using tactics
```
Notes:
* Autoparams now run their tactics without any error recovery or
error-to-sorry enabled. This enables catching the error and reporting
the contextual information. This is justified on the grounds that
autoparams are not interactive.
* Autoparams for applications now cleanup the autoParam annotation,
bringing it in line with autoparams for structure fields.
* This preserves the old behavior that autoparams leave terminfo, but we
will revisit this after some imminent improvements to the unused
variable linter.
Closes#2950
`elabEvalUnsafe` already does something similar: it also instantiates
universe metavariables, but it is not clear to me whether that is
sensible here.
To be conservative, I leave it out of this PR.
See https://github.com/leanprover/lean4/pull/3090#discussion_r1432007590
for a comparison between `#eval` and `Meta.evalExpr`. This PR is not
trying to fully align them, but just to fix one particular misalignment
that I am impacted by.
Closes#3091
This PR adds the theorems
```
@[simp]
theorem divRec_zero (qr : DivModState w) :
divRec w w 0 n d qr = qr
@[simp]
theorem divRec_succ' (wn : Nat) (qr : DivModState w) :
divRec w wr (wn + 1) n d qr =
let r' := shiftConcat qr.r (n.getLsbD wn)
let input : DivModState w :=
if r' < d then ⟨qr.q.shiftConcat false, r'⟩ else ⟨qr.q.shiftConcat true, r' - d⟩
divRec w (wr + 1) wn n d input
```
The final statements may need some masasging to interoperate with
`bv_decide`. We prove the recurrence for unsigned division by building a
shift-subtract circuit, and then showing that this circuit obeys the
division algorithm's invariant.
---
A `DivModState` is lawful if the remainder width `wr` plus the dividend
width `wn` equals `w`,
and the bitvectors `r` and `n` have values in the bounds given by
bitwidths `wr`, resp. `wn`.
This is a proof engineering choice: An alternative world could have
`r : BitVec wr` and `n : BitVec wn`, but this required much more
dependent typing coercions.
Instead, we choose to declare all involved bitvectors as length `w`, and
then prove that
the values are within their respective bounds.
---------
Co-authored-by: Tobias Grosser <github@grosser.es>
Co-authored-by: Alex Keizer <alex@keizer.dev>
Co-authored-by: Kim Morrison <scott@tqft.net>
Co-authored-by: Tobias Grosser <tobias@grosser.es>
There's a comment on `withHeartbeats` that says "See also
Lean.withSeconds", but his definition does not seem to actually exist.
Hence, I've removed the comment.
Add iff version of `List.IsPrefix.getElem`, and `eq_of_length_le`
variants of `List.IsInfix.eq_of_length, List.IsPrefix.eq_of_length,
List.IsSuffix.eq_of_length`
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.
building upon #3714, this (almost) implements the second half of #3302.
The main effect is that we now get a better error message when `rfl`
fails. For
```lean
example : n+1+m = n + (1+m) := by rfl
```
instead of the wall of text
```
The rfl tactic failed. Possible reasons:
- The goal is not a reflexive relation (neither `=` nor a relation with a @[refl] lemma).
- The arguments of the relation are not equal.
Try using the reflexivity lemma for your relation explicitly, e.g. `exact Eq.refl _` or
`exact HEq.rfl` etc.
n m : Nat
⊢ n + 1 + m = n + (1 + m)
```
we now get
```
error: tactic 'rfl' failed, the left-hand side
n + 1 + m
is not definitionally equal to the right-hand side
n + (1 + m)
n m : Nat
⊢ n + 1 + m = n + (1 + m)
```
Unfortunately, because of very subtle differences in semantics (which
transparency setting is used when reducing the goal and whether the
“implicit lambda” feature applies) I could not make this simply the only
`rfl` implementation. So `rfl` remains a macro and is still expanded to
`eq_refl` (difference transparency setting) and `exact Iff.rfl` and
`exact HEq.rfl` (implicit lambda) to not break existing code. This can
be revised later, so this still closes: #3302.
A user might still be puzzled *why* to terms are not defeq. Explaining
that better (“reduced to… and reduces to… etc.”) would also be great,
but that’s not specific to `rfl`, so better left for some other time.
