From a0993b537d2431c0b39dca6e88cc637fb519af05 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Adam Chlipala Date: Sun, 9 Feb 2020 12:54:33 -0500 Subject: [PATCH] Revising Interpreters before class --- Interpreters.v | 18 +++++++++--------- frap_book.tex | 4 ++-- 2 files changed, 11 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-) diff --git a/Interpreters.v b/Interpreters.v index ee96392..50b7a85 100644 --- a/Interpreters.v +++ b/Interpreters.v @@ -6,7 +6,7 @@ Require Import Frap. -(* We begin with a return to our arithmetic language from the last chapter, +(* We begin with a return to our arithmetic language from BasicSyntax, * adding subtraction*, which will come in handy later. * *: good pun, right? *) Inductive arith : Set := @@ -25,7 +25,7 @@ Example ex2 := Plus (Var "y") (Times (Var "x") (Const 3)). * Actually, it's not quite that simple. * We need to consider the meaning to be a function over a valuation * to the variables, which in turn is itself a finite map from variable - * names to numbers. We use the book library's [map] type family. *) + * names to numbers. We use the book library's [fmap] type family. *) Definition valuation := fmap var nat. (* That is, the domain is [var] (a synonym for [string]) and the codomain/range * is [nat]. *) @@ -97,9 +97,7 @@ Proof. equality. - rewrite IHe1. - rewrite IHe2. - ring. + linear_arithmetic. Qed. (* Well, that's a relief! ;-) *) @@ -121,11 +119,11 @@ Proof. (* One case left after our basic heuristic: * the variable case, naturally! *) - cases (x ==v replaceThis); simplify; try equality. + cases (x ==v replaceThis); simplify; equality. Qed. (* Great; we seem to have gotten that one right, too. *) -(* Let's also defined a pared-down version of the expression-simplificaton +(* Let's also define a pared-down version of the expression-simplification * functions from last chapter. *) Fixpoint doSomeArithmetic (e : arith) : arith := match e with @@ -208,7 +206,8 @@ Fixpoint compile (e : arith) : list instruction := * Skip down to the next theorem to see the overall correctness statement. * It turns out that we need to strengthen the induction hypothesis with a * lemma, to push the proof through. *) -Lemma compile_ok' : forall e v is stack, run (compile e ++ is) v stack = run is v (interp e v :: stack). +Lemma compile_ok' : forall e v is stack, + run (compile e ++ is) v stack = run is v (interp e v :: stack). Proof. induct e; simplify. @@ -310,6 +309,7 @@ Example factorial_ugly := * them from our examples. *) Coercion Const : nat >-> arith. Coercion Var : var >-> arith. +Declare Scope arith_scope. Infix "+" := Plus : arith_scope. Infix "-" := Minus : arith_scope. Infix "*" := Times : arith_scope. @@ -346,7 +346,7 @@ Definition factorial_body := * Note that here we're careful to put the quantified variable [input] *first*, * because the variables coming after it will need to *change* in the course of * the induction. Try switching the order to see what goes wrong if we put -e * [input] later. *) + * [input] later. *) Lemma factorial_ok' : forall input output v, v $? "input" = Some input -> v $? "output" = Some output diff --git a/frap_book.tex b/frap_book.tex index d1da57a..a96a196 100644 --- a/frap_book.tex +++ b/frap_book.tex @@ -138,7 +138,7 @@ However, they go better together. %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% -\chapter{Formalizing Program Syntax} +\chapter{Formalizing Program Syntax}\label{syntax} \section{Concrete Syntax} @@ -698,7 +698,7 @@ Let's shift our attention to what programs \emph{mean}. \newcommand{\msel}[2]{#1(#2)} \newcommand{\mupd}[3]{#1[#2 \mapsto #3]} -To explain the meaning of one of last chapter's arithmetic expressions, we need a way to indicate the value of each variable. +To explain the meaning of one of Chapter \ref{syntax}'s arithmetic expressions, we need a way to indicate the value of each variable. \encoding A theory of \emph{finite maps}\index{finite map} is helpful here. We apply the following notations throughout the book: \\