a92e9c7944
(We already have a simp lemma unfolding `pred` to `· - 1`.) --------- Co-authored-by: Joachim Breitner <mail@joachim-breitner.de>
70 lines
2.3 KiB
Text
70 lines
2.3 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
|
|
-- termination_by (y, 1, 0)
|
|
decreasing_by
|
|
all_goals
|
|
simp_wf
|
|
search_lex solve
|
|
| decreasing_trivial
|
|
| apply Nat.bitwise_rec_lemma; assumption
|
|
|
|
def oprod (x y z : Nat) := eprod x (y - 1) (z + x)
|
|
-- termination_by (y, 0, 1)
|
|
decreasing_by
|
|
simp_wf
|
|
try -- the need for `try` here is fishy
|
|
-- the proof with explicit `termination_by` does not need it, so it should not throw
|
|
-- GuessLex off, but without `try` it does
|
|
-- This appeared after #4522, which made Nat.sub_le a simp lemma
|
|
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
|
|
-- termination_by (y, 0, 0)
|
|
decreasing_by
|
|
simp_wf
|
|
search_lex solve
|
|
| decreasing_trivial
|
|
| apply Nat.bitwise_rec_lemma; assumption
|
|
|
|
end
|