This PR changes the "declaration uses 'sorry'" warning to use backticks
instead of single quotes, consistent with Lean's conventions for
formatting code identifiers in diagnostic messages.
This PR adds a `+all` option to `exact?` and `apply?` that collects all
successful lemmas instead of stopping at the first complete solution.
When `+all` is enabled:
- `exact?` shows all lemmas that completely solve the goal (admits the
goal with `sorry`)
- `apply?` shows all lemmas including both complete and partial
solutions
🤖 Prepared with Claude Code
<!-- CURSOR_SUMMARY -->
---
> [!NOTE]
> Adds a +all flag to exact? and apply? to collect all successful
lemmas, updates library search to support aggregation and proper
star-lemma fallback, and extends the discriminator tree to
extract/append dropped entries; includes tests.
>
> - **Tactics / UI**:
> - Add `LibrarySearchConfig.all` and `+all` flag to `exact?`/`apply?`
to collect all successful lemmas.
> - `exact?` now aggregates complete solutions (via
`addExactSuggestions`); `apply?` shows both complete and partial
suggestions.
> - Updated help texts and error/hint messages.
> - **Library Search Core (`Lean.Meta.Tactic.LibrarySearch`)**:
> - Thread new `collectAll` option through `tryOnEach`,
`librarySearch'`, and `librarySearch`.
> - `tryOnEach` continues collecting complete solutions when `collectAll
= true`.
> - Star-lemma fallback now runs even when primary search yields only
partial results; include complete solutions when aggregating.
> - Cache and retrieve star-indexed lemmas via
`droppedEntriesRef`/`getStarLemmas`.
> - **Lazy Discriminator Tree (`Lean.Meta.LazyDiscrTree`)**:
> - Add `extractKey(s)`/`collectSubtreeAux` to extract and drop entries,
returning them.
> - Modify import/module tree building to optionally append dropped
entries to a shared ref (for star-lemmas), and pass this through
`findMatches`/`createModuleTreeRef`.
> - Minor comment/logic tweaks (append vs set) when handling dropped
entries.
> - **Elaboration (`Lean.Elab.Tactic.LibrarySearch`)**:
> - Integrate `collectAll` into `exact?`/`apply?`; partition and present
complete vs incomplete suggestions; admit goals appropriately when
aggregating.
> - **Tests**:
> - Update existing expectations and add
`tests/lean/run/library_search_all.lean` to verify `+all`, aggregation,
and star-lemma behavior.
>
> <sup>Written by [Cursor
Bugbot](https://cursor.com/dashboard?tab=bugbot) for commit
cbfc9313affad45012ebd5ac40b338ee829009b1. This will update automatically
on new commits. Configure
[here](https://cursor.com/dashboard?tab=bugbot).</sup>
<!-- /CURSOR_SUMMARY -->
---------
Co-authored-by: Claude <noreply@anthropic.com>
This PR re-enables star-indexed lemmas as a fallback for `exact?` and
`apply?`.
Star-indexed lemmas (those with overly-general discrimination tree keys
like `[*]`)
were previously dropped entirely for performance reasons. This caused
useful lemmas
like `Empty.elim`, `And.left`, `not_not.mp`, `Sum.elim`, and
`Function.mtr` to be
unfindable by library search.
The implementation adds a two-pass search strategy:
1. First, search using concrete discrimination keys (the current
behavior)
2. If no results are found, fall back to trying star-indexed lemmas
The star-indexed lemmas are extracted during tree initialization and
cached in an
environment extension, avoiding repeated computation.
Users can disable the fallback with `-star`:
```lean
example {α : Sort u} (h : Empty) : α := by apply? -star -- error: no lemmas found
example {α : Sort u} (h : Empty) : α := by apply? -- finds Empty.elim
```
🤖 Prepared with Claude Code
---------
Co-authored-by: Claude <noreply@anthropic.com>
This PR adds support for interactivity to the combined "try this"
messages that were introduced in #9966. In doing so, it moves the link
to apply a suggestion to a separate `[apply]` button in front of the
suggestion. Hints with diffs remain unchanged, as they did not
previously support interacting with terms in the diff, either.
<img width="379" height="256" alt="Suggestion with interactive message"
src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/7838ebf6-0613-46e7-bc88-468a05acbf51"
/>
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 filters out all declarations from `Lean.*`, `*.Tactic.*`, and
`*.Linter.*` from the results of `exact?` and `rw?`.
---------
Co-authored-by: damiano <adomani@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: Markus Himmel <markus@lean-fro.org>
This PR changes the behaviour of `apply?` so that the `sorry` it uses to
close the goal is non-synthetic. (Recall that correct use of synthetic
sorries requires that the tactic also generates an error message, which
we don't want to do in this situation.) Either this PR or #8230 are
sufficient to defend against the problem reported in #8212.
