This PR introduces an explicit `defeq` attribute to mark theorems that
can be used by `dsimp`. The benefit of an explicit attribute over the
prior logic of looking at the proof body is that we can reliably omit
theorem bodies across module boundaries. It also helps with intra-file
parallelism.
If a theorem is syntactically defined by `:= rfl`, then the attribute is
assumed and need not given explicitly. This is a purely syntactic check
and can be fooled, e.g. if in the current namespace, `rfl` is not
actually “the” `rfl` of `Eq`. In that case, some other syntax has be
used, such as `:= (rfl)`. This is also the way to go if a theorem can be
proved by `defeq`, but one does not actually want `dsimp` to use this
fact.
The `defeq` attribute will look at the *type* of the declaration, not
the body, to check if it really holds definitionally. Because of
different reduction settings, this can sometimes go wrong. Then one
should also write `:= (rfl)`, if one does not want this to be a defeq
theorem. (If one does then this is currently not possible, but it’s
probably a bad idea anyways).
The `set_option debug.tactic.simp.checkDefEqAttr true`, `dsimp` will
warn if could not apply a lemma due to a missing `defeq` attribute.
With `set_option backward.dsimp.useDefEqAttr.get false` one can revert
to the old behavior of inferring rfl-ness based on the theorem body.
Both options will go away eventually (too bad we can’t mark them as
deprecated right away, see #7969)
Meta programs that generate theorems (e.g. equational theorems) can use
`inferDefEqAttr` to set the attribute based on the theorem body of the
just created declaration.
This builds on #8501 to update Init to `@[expose]` a fair amount of
definitions that, if not exposed, would prevent some existing `:= rfl`
theorems from being `defeq` theorems. In the interest of starting
backwards compatible, I exposed these function. Hopefully many can be
un-exposed later again.
A mathlib adaption branch exists that includes both the meta programming
fixes and changes to the theorems (e.g. changing `:= by rfl` to `:=
rfl`).
With the module system there is now no special handling for `defeq`
theorem bodies, because we don’t look at the body anymore. The previous
hack is removed. The `defeq`-ness of the theorem needs to be checked in
the context of the theorem’s *type*; the error message contains a hint
if the defeq check fails because of the exported context.
A `Prop`-valued inductive type is a syntactic subsingleton if it has at
most one constructor and all the arguments to the constructor are in
`Prop`. Such types have large elimination, so they could be defined in
`Type` or `Prop` without any trouble, though users tend to expect that
such types define a `Prop` and need to learn to insert `: Prop`.
Currently, the default universe for types is `Type`. This PR adds a
heuristic: if a type is a syntactic subsingleton with exactly one
constructor, and the constructor has at least one parameter, then the
`inductive` command will prefer creating a `Prop` instead of a `Type`.
For `structure`, we ask for at least one field.
More generally, for mutual inductives, each type needs to be a syntactic
subsingleton, at least one type must have one constructor, and at least
one constructor must have at least one parameter. The motivation for
this restriction is that every inductive type starts with a zero
constructors and each constructor starts with zero fields, and
stubbed-out types shouldn't be `Prop`.
Thanks to @arthur-adjedj for the investigation in #2695 and to @digama0
for formulating the heuristic.
Closes#2690
