You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Consider a lemma of the form H: forall x, P x => Q x => R x and a goal of the form P y => Q y => T y.
I would like to be able to apply H as a view to P y and Q y in one go, so that move=> /H (with suitable syntax) leaves goal R y => T y.
One syntax (riffing off the recent extension on including intro-patterns in proof terms) could be move=> (H _ ^ ^). This would then enable a mix of instantiation and deferral for view hypotheses. [^2], for example, could be used to reorder top assumptions when applying the view.
Most of this can (probably) be implemented internally as introducing select top assumptions and constructing the proof term to apply as a view.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Consider a lemma of the form
H: forall x, P x => Q x => R x
and a goal of the formP y => Q y => T y
.I would like to be able to apply
H
as a view toP y
andQ y
in one go, so thatmove=> /H
(with suitable syntax) leaves goalR y => T y
.One syntax (riffing off the recent extension on including intro-patterns in proof terms) could be
move=> (H _ ^ ^)
. This would then enable a mix of instantiation and deferral for view hypotheses.[^2]
, for example, could be used to reorder top assumptions when applying the view.Most of this can (probably) be implemented internally as introducing select top assumptions and constructing the proof term to apply as a view.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: