b5122b6a7b
This change * moves `termination_by` and `decreasing_by` next to the function they apply to * simplify the syntax of `termination_by` * apply the `decreasing_by` goal to all goals at once, for better interactive use. See the section in `RELEASES.md` for more details and migration advise. This is a hard breaking change, requiring developers to touch every `termination_by` in their code base. We decided to still do it as a hard-breaking change, because supporting both old and new syntax at the same time would be non-trivial, and not save that much. Moreover, this requires changes to some metaprograms that developers might have written, and supporting both syntaxes at the same time would make _their_ migration harder.
70 lines
2.2 KiB
Text
70 lines
2.2 KiB
Text
/-!
|
|
A “tricky” example from “Finding Lexicographic Orders for Termination Proofs in
|
|
Isabelle/HOL” by Lukas Bulwahn, Alexander Krauss, and Tobias Nipkow,
|
|
10.1007/978-3-540-74591-4_5
|
|
|
|
At the time of writing, Lean is able to find the lexicographic order
|
|
just fine, but only if the tactic is powerful enough. In partiuclar,
|
|
the default `decreasing_tactic` can only handle lexicographic descend when either
|
|
the left gets smaller, or the left stays equal and the right gets smaller.
|
|
But here we need to allow the general form, where the left is ≤ and the right
|
|
gets smaller. This needs a backtracking proof search, it seems, which we build here
|
|
(`search_lex`).
|
|
-/
|
|
|
|
set_option showInferredTerminationBy true
|
|
|
|
macro_rules | `(tactic| decreasing_trivial) =>
|
|
`(tactic| apply Nat.le_refl)
|
|
macro_rules | `(tactic| decreasing_trivial) =>
|
|
`(tactic| apply Nat.succ_lt_succ; decreasing_trivial)
|
|
macro_rules | `(tactic| decreasing_trivial) =>
|
|
`(tactic| apply Nat.sub_le)
|
|
macro_rules | `(tactic| decreasing_trivial) =>
|
|
`(tactic| apply Nat.div_le_self)
|
|
|
|
syntax "search_lex " tacticSeq : tactic
|
|
|
|
macro_rules | `(tactic|search_lex $ts:tacticSeq) => `(tactic| (
|
|
solve
|
|
| apply Prod.Lex.right'
|
|
· $ts
|
|
· search_lex $ts
|
|
| apply Prod.Lex.left
|
|
· $ts
|
|
| $ts
|
|
))
|
|
|
|
-- set_option trace.Elab.definition.wf true in
|
|
mutual
|
|
def prod (x y z : Nat) : Nat :=
|
|
if y % 2 = 0 then eprod x y z else oprod x y z
|
|
decreasing_by
|
|
-- TODO: Why does it not work to wrap it all in `all_goals`?
|
|
all_goals simp_wf
|
|
· search_lex solve
|
|
| decreasing_trivial
|
|
| apply Nat.bitwise_rec_lemma; assumption
|
|
· search_lex solve
|
|
| decreasing_trivial
|
|
| apply Nat.bitwise_rec_lemma; assumption
|
|
|
|
def oprod (x y z : Nat) := eprod x (y - 1) (z + x)
|
|
decreasing_by
|
|
simp_wf
|
|
search_lex solve
|
|
| decreasing_trivial
|
|
| apply Nat.bitwise_rec_lemma; assumption
|
|
|
|
def eprod (x y z : Nat) := if y = 0 then z else prod (2 * x) (y / 2) z
|
|
decreasing_by
|
|
simp_wf
|
|
search_lex solve
|
|
| decreasing_trivial
|
|
| apply Nat.bitwise_rec_lemma; assumption
|
|
|
|
end
|
|
-- termination_by
|
|
-- prod x y z => (y, 2)
|
|
-- oprod x y z => (y, 1)
|
|
-- eprod x y z => (y, 0)
|