This PR adjusts the "try this" widget to be rendered as a widget message
under 'Messages', not a separate widget under a 'Suggestions' section.
The main benefit of this is that the message of the widget is not
duplicated between 'Messages' and 'Suggestions'.
Since widget message suggestions were already implemented by @jrr6 for
the new hint infrastructure, this PR replaces the old "try this"
implementation with the new hint infrastructure. In doing so, the
`style?` field of suggestions is deprecated, since the hint
infrastructure highlights hints using diff colors, and `style?` also
never saw much use downstream. Additionally, since the message and the
suggestion are now the same component, the `messageData?` field of
suggestions is deprecated as well. Notably, the "Try this:" message
string now also contains a newline and indentation to separate the
suggestion from the rest of the message more clearly and the `postInfo?`
field of the suggestion is now part of the message.
Finally, this PR changes the diff colors used by the hint infrastructure
to be more color-blindness-friendly (insertions are now blue, not green,
and text that remains unchanged is now using the editor foreground color
instead of blue).
### Breaking changes
Tests that use `#guard_msgs` to test the "Try this:" message may need to
be adjusted for the new formatting of the message.
This PR improves the “expected type mismatch” error message by omitting
the type's types when they are defeq, and putting them into separate
lines when not.
I found it rather tediuos to parse the error message when the expected
type is long, because I had to find the `:` in the middle of a large
expression somewhere. Also, when both are of sort `Prop` or `Type` it
doesn't add much value to print the sort (and it’s only one hover away
anyways).
This PR makes `#guard_msgs` to treat `trace` messages separate from
`info`, `warning` and `error`. It also introduce the ability to say
`#guard_msgs (pass info`, like `(drop info)` so far, and also adds
`(check info)` as the explicit form of `(info)`, for completeness.
Fixes#8266
This PR modifies `all_goals` so that in recovery mode it commits changes
to the state only for those goals for which the tactic succeeds (while
preserving the new message log state). Before, we were trusting that
failing tactics left things in a reasonable state, but now we roll back
and admit the goal. The changes also fixes a bug where we were rolling
back only the metacontext state and not the tactic state, leading to an
inconsistent state (a goal list with metavariables not in the
metacontext). Closes#7883
Alternatively we could stop on the first error, however it is helpful to
see what the tactic did to each goal while interactively writing a
tactic script. There is some non-monotonicity here though since tactics
can solve for metavariables that appear in successive goals, and
conceivably a later goal succeeds only if a previous one does. Given
that the non-monotonicity is limited to recovery mode (which is for
example the RHS and not the LHS of the `<;>` combinator), we think this
is acceptable.
Another justification for the change to roll back the state on each
failure is that we need to admit goals in the failing cases. When a
tactic throws an error, we cannot assume the goal list is meaningful.
Rolling back lets us admit just the goal the tactic started with,
without needing to try to work out which new metavariables should be
admitted in the error state, allowing the tactic to continue trying the
tactic on the next goal.
This PR enables the elaboration of theorem bodies, i.e. proofs, to
happen in parallel to each other as well as to other elaboration tasks.
Specifically, to be eligible for parallel proof elaboration,
* the theorem must not be in a `mutual` block
* `deprecated.oldSectionVars` must not be set
* `Elab.async` must be set (currently defaults to `true` in the language
server, `false` on the cmdline)
To be activated for downstream projects (i.e. in stage 1) pending
further Mathlib validation.
New behavior: when in recovery mode, if any tactic fails in `all_goals`
then the metacontext is restored and all goals are admitted.
Without this, it can leave partially-solved metavariables and incomplete
goal lists.
Many of our tests in `tests/lean/run/` produce output from `#eval` (or
`#check`) statements, that is then ignored.
This PR tries to capture all the useful output using `#guard_msgs`. I've
only done a cursory check that the output is still sane --- there is a
chance that some "unchecked" tests have already accumulated regressions
and this just cements them!
In the other direction, I did identify two rotten tests:
* a minor one in `setStructInstNotation.lean`, where a comment says `Set
Nat`, but `#check` actually prints `?_`. Weird?
* `CompilerProbe.lean` is generating empty output, apparently indicating
that something is broken, but I don't know the signficance of this file.
In any case, I'll ask about these elsewhere.
(This started by noticing that a recent `grind` test file had an
untested `trace_state`, and then got carried away.)
@Kha It has a few advantages over `<or>` (`<|>`).
- It is not an infix operator.
- It takes tactic sequences instead of tactics as arguments
For example, we can write
```
first
| apply h1; assumption
| exact y; exact h3; assumption
```
or
```
first apply h1; assumption | exact y; exact h3; assumption
```
instead of
```
(apply h1; assumption) <|> (exact y; exact h3; assumption)
```
