This PR changes the implementation of a function `unfoldPredRel` used in
(co)inductive predicate machinery, that unfolds pointwise order on
predicates to quantifications and implications. Previous implementation
relied on `withDeclsDND` that could not deal with types which depend on
each other. This caused the following example to fail:
```lean4
inductive infSeq_functor1.{u} {α : Type u} (r : α → α → Prop) (call : {α : Type u} → (r : α → α → Prop) → α → Prop) : α → Prop where
| step : r a b → infSeq_functor1 r call b → infSeq_functor1 r call a
def infSeq1 (r : α → α → Prop) : α → Prop := infSeq_functor1 r (infSeq1)
coinductive_fixpoint monotonicity by sorry
#check infSeq1.coinduct
```
Closes#10234.
This PR eliminates uses of `intros x y z` (with arguments) and updates
the `intros` docstring to suggest that `intro x y z` should be used
instead. The `intros` tactic is historical, and can be traced all the
way back to Lean 2, when `intro` could only introduce a single
hypothesis. Since 2020, the `intro` tactic has superceded it. The
`intros` tactic (without arguments) is currently still useful.
This PR introduces a `mutual_induct` variant of the generated
(co)induction proof principle for mutually defined (co)inductive
predicates. Unlike the standard (co)induction principle (which projects
conclusions separately for each predicate), `mutual_induct` produces a
conjunction of all conclusions.
## Example
Given the following mutual definition:
```lean4
mutual
def f : Prop := g
coinductive_fixpoint
def g : Prop := f
coinductive_fixpoint
end
```
Standard coinduction principles:
```lean4
f.coind : ∀ (pred_1 pred_2 : Prop), (pred_1 → pred_2) → (pred_2 → pred_1) → pred_1 → f
g.coind : ∀ (pred_1 pred_2 : Prop), (pred_1 → pred_2) → (pred_2 → pred_1) → pred_2 → g
```
New `mutual_induct`principle:
```lean4
f.mutual_induct: ∀ (pred_1 pred_2 : Prop), (pred_1 → pred_2) → (pred_2 → pred_1) → (pred_1 → f) ∧ (pred_2 → g)
```
---------
Co-authored-by: Joachim Breitner <mail@joachim-breitner.de>
This PR adds support for generating lattice-theoretic (co)induction
proof principles for predicates defined via `mutual` blocks using
`inductive_fixpoint`/`coinductive_fixpoint` constructs.
### Key Changes
- The order on product lattices (used to define fixpoints of mutual
blocks) is unfolded.
- Hypotheses in generated principles are curried.
- Conclusions are projected to focus only on the predicate of interest
(rather than being a conjunction of conclusions for all functions
defined in the `mutual` block.
### Example
Given:
```lean4
mutual
def f : Prop :=
g
coinductive_fixpoint
def g : Prop :=
f
coinductive_fixpoint
end
```
The system now generates these coinduction principles:
```lean4
f.coinduct (pred_1 pred_2 : Prop) (hyp_1 : pred_1 → pred_2) (hyp_2 : pred_2 → pred_1) : pred_1 → f
```
and
```lean4
g.coinduct (pred_1 pred_2 : Prop) (hyp_1 : pred_1 → pred_2) (hyp_2 : pred_2 → pred_1) : pred_2 → g
```
---------
Co-authored-by: Joachim Breitner <mail@joachim-breitner.de>
This PR introduces antitonicity lemmas that support the elaboration of
mixed inductive-coinductive predicates defined using the
`least_fixpoint` / `greatest_fixpoint` constructs.
For instance, the following definition elaborates correctly because all
occurrences of the inductively defined predicate `tock `within the
coinductive definition of `tick` appear in negative positions. The dual
situation applies to the definition of `tock`:
```
mutual
def tick : Prop :=
tock → tick
greatest_fixpoint
def tock : Prop :=
tick → tock
least_fixpoint
end
```
This PR adds support for inductive and coinductive predicates defined
using lattice theoretic structures on `Prop`. These are syntactically
defined using `greatest_fixpoint` or `least_fixpoint` termination
clauses for recursive `Prop`-valued functions. The functionality relies
on `partial_fixpoint` machinery and requires function definitions to be
monotone. For non-mutually recursive predicates, an appropriate
(co)induction proof principle (given by Park induction) is generated.
Summary of changes:
- `Interal.Order.Basic` now contains `CompleteLattice` class, as well as
version of Knaster-Tarski fixpoint theorem (with an associated Park
induction principle) for the internal use for defining (co)inductive
predicates. `Prop` is shown to have two complete lattice structures (one
given by implication order for defining inductive predicates, and one
given by reverse implication for defining coinductive predicates).
Additionally, proofs that lattices are closed under products and
function spaces are included.
- Partial fixpoint's `EqnInfo` now additionally carries an information
whether something is defined as a lattice-theoretic fixpoint or via
CCPOs.
- When constructing a (co)inductive predicate,`PartialFixpoint/Main`
builds an appropriate lattice structure on the type of the predicate
using product lattice, function space lattice and an appropriate lattice
instance on `Prop`.
- `PartialFixpoint/Eqns` is modified to be able to perform rewrite under
lattice-theoretic fixpoint construction
- `PartialFixpoint/Induction`contains a case split for handling of the
(co)inductive predicates. In the case of lattice-theoretic fixpoints, it
appropriately desugars the Park induction principle.
