This PR adds raw transmutation of floating-point numbers to and from
`UInt64`. Floats and UInts share the same endianness across all
supported platforms. The IEEE 754 standard precisely specifies the bit
layout of floats. Note that `Float.toBits` is distinct from
`Float.toUInt64`, which attempts to preserve the numeric value rather
than the bitwise value.
closes#6071
This PR adds the Lean.RArray data structure.
This data structure is equivalent to `Fin n → α` or `Array α`, but
optimized for a fast kernel-reduction `get` operation.
It is not suitable as a general-purpose data structure. The primary
intended use case is the “denote” function of a typical proof by
reflection proof, where only the `get` operation is necessary, and where
using `List.get` unnecessarily slows down proofs with more than a
hand-full of atomic expressions.
There is no well-formedness invariant attached to this data structure,
to keep it concise; it's semantics is given through `RArray.get`. In
that way one can also view an `RArray` as a decision tree implementing
`Nat → α`.
In #6068 this data structure is used in `simp_arith`.
Not a huge benefit, but actually reduces the code complexity (no need
for the `.fuse` function), and can help with problems with many repeated
varibles.
This PR fixes a bug where the monad lift coercion elaborator would
partially unify expressions even if they were not monads. This could be
taken advantage of to propagate information that could help elaboration
make progress, for example the first `change` worked because the monad
lift coercion elaborator was unifying `@Eq _ _` with `@Eq (Nat × Nat)
p`:
```lean
example (p : Nat × Nat) : p = p := by
change _ = ⟨_, _⟩ -- used to work (yielding `p = (p.fst, p.snd)`), now it doesn't
change ⟨_, _⟩ = _ -- never worked
```
As such, this is a breaking change; you may need to adjust expressions
to include additional implicit arguments.
This PR implements conversion functions from `Bool` to all `UIntX` and
`IntX` types.
Note that `Bool.toUInt64` already existed in previous versions of Lean.
This PR modifies the order of arguments for higher-order `Array`
functions, preferring to put the `Array` last (besides positional
arguments with defaults). This is more consistent with the `List` API,
and is more flexible, as dot notation allows two different partially
applied versions.
This PR changes the signature of `Array.get` to take a Nat and a proof,
rather than a `Fin`, for consistency with the rest of the (planned)
Array API. Note that because of bootstrapping issues we can't provide
`get_elem_tactic` as an autoparameter for the proof. As users will
mostly use the `xs[i]` notation provided by `GetElem`, this hopefully
isn't a problem.
We may restore `Fin` based versions, either here or downstream, as
needed, but they won't be the "main" functions.
---------
Co-authored-by: David Thrane Christiansen <david@davidchristiansen.dk>
This PR adds a normalization rule to `bv_normalize` (which is used by
`bv_decide`) that converts `x / 2^k` into `x >>> k` under suitable
conditions. This allows us to simplify the expensive division circuits
that are used for bitblasting into much cheaper shifting circuits.
Concretely, it allows for the following canonicalization:
```lean
example {x : BitVec 16} : x / (BitVec.twoPow 16 2) = x >>> 2 := by bv_normalize
example {x : BitVec 16} : x / (BitVec.ofNat 16 8) = x >>> 3 := by bv_normalize
```
This PR changes the signature of `Array.set` to take a `Nat`, and a
tactic-provided bound, rather than a `Fin`.
Corresponding changes (but without the auto-param) for `Array.get` will
arrive shortly, after which I'll go more pervasively through the Array
API.
This PR is a follow-up to https://github.com/leanprover/lean4/pull/5609,
where we add lemmas characterizing `smtUDiv` and `smtSDiv`'s behavior
when the denominator is zero.
We build some `slt` theory, connecting it to `msb` for a clean proof. I
chose not to characterize `slt` in terms of `msb` a `simp` lemma, since
I anticipate use cases where we want to keep the arithmetic
interpretation of `slt`.
This PR verifies the `keys` function on `Std.HashMap`.
---
Initial discussions have already happend with @TwoFX and we are
collaborating on this matter.
This will remain a draft as long as not all desired results have been
added.
If we should still create an issue for the topic of this PR, let us
know.
Of course, any other feedback is appreciated as well :)
---------
Co-authored-by: Markus Himmel <markus@lean-fro.org>
Co-authored-by: monsterkrampe <monsterkrampe@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: jt0202 <johannes.tantow@gmail.com>
This PR relates the operations `findSomeM?`, `findM?`, `findSome?`, and
`find?` on `Array` with the corresponding operations on `List`, and also
provides simp lemmas for the `Array` operations `findSomeRevM?`,
`findRevM?`, `findSomeRev?`, `findRev?` (in terms of `reverse` and the
usual forward find operations).
Following up #5928, updates the syntax for `omega` and `solve_by_elim`
and restores the syntax quotations in their implementations.
Following up #5898, uses the new tactic syntax in the library, replacing
all uses of `(config := ...)`.
There are many more lemmas about `foldlM`, so this may be useful for
reasoning about for loops by transforming them into folds.
The transformation includes accounting for monad effects, but does have
a mild performance difference in that short-circuiting on
`ForInStep.done` is replaced by traversing the rest of the list with a
noop.
