073b2cfc83
as #4527 describes there is inconsistency between `by`, `case` and `next` on the one hand who, if the goal isn’t closed, put squiggly underlines on the first line, and `.`, which so far only squiggled the dot (which is a very short symbol!) With this change the same mechanism as used by `case`, namely `withCaseRef`, is also used for `.`. There is an argument for the status quo: The `.` tactic is more commonly used with further tactics on the same line, and thus there is now a higher risk that the user might think that the first tactic is broken. But * the same argument does apply to `by` and `case` where there was an intentional choice to do it this way * consistency and * a squiggly line just under the short `.` is easy to miss, so it is actually better to underlining more here (at least until we have a better way to indicate incomplete proofs, which I have hopes for) Fixes #4527, at least most of it.
10 lines
336 B
Text
10 lines
336 B
Text
{"version": 1,
|
|
"uri": "file:///issue4527.lean",
|
|
"diagnostics":
|
|
[{"source": "Lean 4",
|
|
"severity": 1,
|
|
"range":
|
|
{"start": {"line": 1, "character": 2}, "end": {"line": 2, "character": 0}},
|
|
"message": "unsolved goals\n⊢ True",
|
|
"fullRange":
|
|
{"start": {"line": 1, "character": 2}, "end": {"line": 3, "character": 8}}}]}
|