59 lines
2.7 KiB
Text
59 lines
2.7 KiB
Text
-- This example demonstrates how to specify a proof skeleton that contains
|
|
-- "holes" that must be filled using user-defined tactics.
|
|
|
|
(*
|
|
-- Import useful macros for creating tactics
|
|
import("tactic.lua")
|
|
|
|
-- Define a simple tactic using Lua
|
|
auto = Repeat(OrElse(assumption_tac(), conj_tac(), conj_hyp_tac()))
|
|
|
|
conj_hyp = conj_hyp_tac()
|
|
conj = conj_tac()
|
|
*)
|
|
|
|
-- The (by [tactic]) expression is essentially creating a "hole" and associating a "hint" to it.
|
|
-- The "hint" is a tactic that should be used to fill the "hole".
|
|
-- In the following example, we use the tactic "auto" defined by the Lua code above.
|
|
--
|
|
-- The (have [expr] by [tactic]) expression is also creating a "hole" and associating a "hint" to it.
|
|
-- The expression [expr] after the shows is fixing the type of the "hole"
|
|
Theorem T1 (A B : Bool) : A /\ B -> B /\ A :=
|
|
fun assumption : A /\ B,
|
|
let lemma1 : A := (by auto),
|
|
lemma2 : B := (by auto)
|
|
in (have B /\ A by auto)
|
|
|
|
print Environment 1. -- print proof for the previous theorem
|
|
|
|
-- When hints are not provided, the user must fill the (remaining) holes using tactic command sequences.
|
|
-- Each hole must be filled with a tactic command sequence that terminates with the command 'done' and
|
|
-- successfully produces a proof term for filling the hole. Here is the same example without hints
|
|
-- This style is more convenient for interactive proofs
|
|
Theorem T2 (A B : Bool) : A /\ B -> B /\ A :=
|
|
fun assumption : A /\ B,
|
|
let lemma1 : A := _, -- first hole
|
|
lemma2 : B := _ -- second hole
|
|
in _. -- third hole
|
|
auto. done. -- tactic command sequence for the first hole
|
|
auto. done. -- tactic command sequence for the second hole
|
|
auto. done. -- tactic command sequence for the third hole
|
|
|
|
-- In the following example, instead of using the "auto" tactic, we apply a sequence of even simpler tactics.
|
|
Theorem T3 (A B : Bool) : A /\ B -> B /\ A :=
|
|
fun assumption : A /\ B,
|
|
let lemma1 : A := _, -- first hole
|
|
lemma2 : B := _ -- second hole
|
|
in _. -- third hole
|
|
conj_hyp. exact. done. -- tactic command sequence for the first hole
|
|
conj_hyp. exact. done. -- tactic command sequence for the second hole
|
|
conj. exact. done. -- tactic command sequence for the third hole
|
|
|
|
-- We can also mix the two styles (hints and command sequences)
|
|
Theorem T4 (A B : Bool) : A /\ B -> B /\ A :=
|
|
fun assumption : A /\ B,
|
|
let lemma1 : A := _, -- first hole
|
|
lemma2 : B := _ -- second hole
|
|
in (have B /\ A by auto).
|
|
auto. done. -- tactic command sequence for the first hole
|
|
auto. done. -- tactic command sequence for the second hole
|