I'll update `list_simp.lean` (simp normal form testing) and add missing
lemmas in follow-up PRs.
This just upstreams the material, and reorders the lemmas to match the
other sections.
This PR refactors the 'ext' attribute and implements the following
features:
- The 'local' and 'scoped' attribute kinds are now usable.
- The attribute realizes the `ext`/`ext_iff` lemmas when they do not
already exist, rather than always generating them. This is useful in
conjunction with `@[local ext]`.
- Adding `@[ext]` to a user ext lemma now realizes an `ext_iff` lemma as
well; formerly this was only for structures. The name of the generated
`ext_iff` theorem for a user `ext` theorem named `A.B.myext` is
`A.B.myext_iff`. If this process leads to an error, the user can write
`@[ext (iff := false)]` to disable this feature.
Breaking changes:
- Now the "x" and "y" term arguments to the realized `ext` and `ext_iff`
lemmas are implicit.
- Now the realized `ext` and `ext_iff` lemmas are protected.
Bootstrapping notes:
- There are a few `ext_iff` lemmas to address after the next stage0
update.
Closes https://github.com/leanprover/lean4/issues/3643
Suggested by Floris [on
Zulip](https://leanprover.zulipchat.com/#narrow/stream/113488-general/topic/.22Missing.20Tactics.22.20list/near/446267660).
### Preliminary PRs:
- [x] #4597
- [x] #4599
- [x] #4600
- [x] #4602
- [x] #4603
- [x] #4604
- [x] #4605
- [x] #4607
- [x] #4627
- [x] #4629
### Quick overview over API/naming changes compared to `Lean.HashMap`
and `Batteries.HashMap`:
#### Lean
* `find?` -> `get?`/`getElem?`
* `find!` -> `get!`/`gtetElem!`
* `findD` -> `getD`
* `findEntry?` -> not implemented for now
* `insert'` -> `containsThenInsert` (order reversed in result)
* `insertIfNew` -> `getThenInsertIfNew?` (order reversed in result)
* `numBuckets` -> `Internal.numBuckets`
* `ofListWith` -> not implemented for now
* `Array.groupByKey` -> not implemented for now
* `merge` -> not implemented for now, but you can use `insertMany`
#### Batteries
* `modify` -> not implemented for now
* `mergeWith` -> not implemented for now
* `mergeWithM` -> not implemented for now
Split from #4583
There are two open questions, opinions appreciated:
- Should this material be part of `Init` or `Std`?
- Should the typeclasses be in the `Std` namespace?
Split from #4583
`exists_of_set` appears in Batteries as `exists_of_set'`. The
`exists_of_set` version is unused in batteries and mathlib at least and
I would argue that the primed version (i.e., the one added in this PR)
is always better anyway.
`isEmpty_iff` appears in mathlib as `isEmpty_iff_eq_nil`.
This implements the recurrence theorems `getLsb_mul`, `mulRec_zero_eq`,
`mulRec_succ_eq` to allow bitblasting multiplication.
---------
Co-authored-by: Kim Morrison <scott@tqft.net>
This example, reported from LNSym, started failing when we changed the
definition of `Fin.sub` in
https://github.com/leanprover/lean4/pull/4421.
When we use the new definition, `omega` produces a proof term that the
kernel is very slow on.
To work around this for now, I've removed `BitVec.toNat_sub` from the
`bv_toNat` simp set,
and replaced it with `BitVec.toNat_sub'` which uses the old definition
for subtraction.
This is only a workaround, and I would like to understand why the term
chokes the kernel.
```
example
(n : Nat)
(addr2 addr1 : BitVec 64)
(h0 : n ≤ 18446744073709551616)
(h1 : addr2 + 18446744073709551615#64 - addr1 ≤ BitVec.ofNat 64 (n - 1))
(h2 : addr2 - addr1 ≤ addr2 + 18446744073709551615#64 - addr1) :
n = 18446744073709551616 := by
bv_omega
```
We add a new definition `BitVec.twoPow w i` to represent `(1#w <<< i)`.
This expression is used to test bits when building the multiplication
bitblaster.
Patch 1/?, being peeled from https://github.com/opencompl/lean4/pull/6.
---------
Co-authored-by: Tobias Grosser <github@grosser.es>
Fixes typo "reflexivitiy" to "reflexivity", and changes exact Eq.rfl to
exact rfl, since Eq.rfl does not exist.
(I got something confused wrt the bot message on #4367 and accidentally
closed that one, so making this one instead, which I think satisfies the
requirements it wanted.)
---------
Co-authored-by: Joachim Breitner <mail@joachim-breitner.de>
This PR introduces complete simprocs for all the Int versions of
div/mod, and makes some small refactoring of Int lemmas and
library_search.
---------
Co-authored-by: Kim Morrison <kim@tqft.net>
The linters in Batteries can be used to spot mistakes in Lean. See the
message on
[Zulip](https://leanprover.zulipchat.com/#narrow/stream/270676-lean4/topic/Go-to-def.20on.20typeclass.20fields.20and.20type-dependent.20notation/near/442613564).
These are the different linters with errors:
- unusedArguments:
There are many unused instance arguments, especially a redundant `[Monad
m]` is very common
- checkUnivs:
There was a problem with universes in a definition in
`Init.Control.StateCps`. I fixed it by adding a `variable` statement for
the implicit arguments in the file.
- defLemma:
many proofs are written as `def` instead of `theorem`, most notably
`rfl`. Because `rfl` is used as a match pattern, it must be a def. Is
this desirable?
The keyword `abbrev` is sometimes used for an alias of a theorem, which
also results in a def. I would want to replace it with the `alias`
keyword to fix this, but it isn't available.
- dupNamespace:
I fixed some of these, but left `Tactic.Tactic` and `Parser.Parser` as
they are as these seem intended.
- unusedHaveSuffices:
I cleaned up a few proofs with unused `have` or `suffices`
- explicitVarsOfIff:
I didn't fix any of these, because that would be a breaking change.
- simpNF:
I didn't fix any of these, because I think that requires knowing the
intended simplification order.
Continuation of #3958. To ensure that lean code is able to uphold the
invariant that `String`s are valid UTF-8 (which is assumed by the lean
model), we have to make sure that no lean objects are created with
invalid UTF-8. #3958 covers the case of lean code creating strings via
`fromUTF8Unchecked`, but there are still many cases where C++ code
constructs strings from a `const char *` or `std::string` with unclear
UTF-8 status.
To address this and minimize accidental missed validation, the
`(lean_)mk_string` function is modified to validate UTF-8. The original
function is renamed to `mk_string_unchecked`, with several other
variants depending on whether we know the string is UTF-8 or ASCII and
whether we have the length and/or utf8 char count on hand. I reviewed
every function which leads to `mk_string` or its variants in the C code,
and used the appropriate validation function, defaulting to `mk_string`
if the provenance is unclear.
This PR adds no new error handling paths, meaning that incorrect UTF-8
will still produce incorrect results in e.g. IO functions, they are just
not causing unsound behavior anymore. A subsequent PR will handle adding
better error reporting for bad UTF-8.
