by showing the matrix of calls and measures, and what we know about that
call (=, <, ≤, ?), e.g.
guessLexFailures.lean:27:0-33:31: error: Could not find a decreasing
measure.
The arguments relate at each recursive call as follows:
(<, ≤, =: relation proved, ? all proofs failed, _: no proof attempted)
x1 x2 x3
1) 29:6-25 = = =
2) 30:6-23 = ? <
3) 31:6-23 < _ _
Please use `termination_by` to specify a decreasing measure
It’s a bit more verbose for mutual functions.
It will use the user-specified argument names for functions written
```
foo (n : Nat) := …
```
but not with pattern matching like
```
foo : Nat → …
| n => …
```
This can be refined later and separately (and maybe right away in
`expandMatchAltsWhereDecls`).
If here is only one plausible measure, there is no point having the
`GuessLex` code see if it
is terminating, running all the tactics, only for the `MkFix` code then
run the tactics again.
So if there is only one plausible measure (non-mutual recursion with
only one varying
parameter), just use that measure.
Side benefit: If the function isn’t terminating, more detailed error
messages are shown
(failing proof goals), located at the recursive calls.
previously, only the WellFounded code was making use of the error
location in the RecApp-metadata. We can do the same for structural
recursion. This way,
```
def f (n : Nat) : Nat :=
match n with
| 0 => 0
| n + 1 => f (n + 1)
```
will show the error with squiggly lines under `f (n + 1)`, and not at
`def f`.
