mirror of
https://github.com/achlipala/frap.git
synced 2024-11-10 00:07:51 +00:00
Start HoareLogic, with several examples
This commit is contained in:
Adam Chlipala
parent
d9c5173720
commit
c8e3a3fdcd
2 changed files with 349 additions and 1 deletions
9
Frap.v
9
Frap.v
|
|
@ -71,11 +71,18 @@ Ltac removeDups :=
|
|||
|| (apply RdDup; [ simpl; intuition congruence | ]))
|
||||
end.
|
||||
|
||||
Ltac simpl_maps :=
|
||||
repeat match goal with
|
||||
| [ |- context[add ?m ?k1 ?v $? ?k2] ] =>
|
||||
(rewrite (@lookup_add_ne _ _ m k1 k2 v) by (congruence || omega))
|
||||
|| (rewrite (@lookup_add_eq _ _ m k1 k2 v) by (congruence || omega))
|
||||
end.
|
||||
|
||||
Ltac simplify := repeat (unifyTails; pose proof I);
|
||||
repeat match goal with
|
||||
| [ H : True |- _ ] => clear H
|
||||
end;
|
||||
repeat progress (simpl in *; intros; try autorewrite with core in *);
|
||||
repeat progress (simpl in *; intros; try autorewrite with core in *; simpl_maps);
|
||||
repeat (removeDups || doSubtract).
|
||||
Ltac propositional := intuition idtac.
|
||||
|
||||
|
|
|
|||
341
HoareLogic.v
Normal file
341
HoareLogic.v
Normal file
|
|
@ -0,0 +1,341 @@
|
|||
(** Formal Reasoning About Programs <http://adam.chlipala.net/frap/>
|
||||
* Chapter 10: Hoare Logic: Verifying Imperative Programs
|
||||
* Author: Adam Chlipala
|
||||
* License: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ *)
|
||||
|
||||
Require Import Frap.
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
(** * Syntax and semantics of a simple imperative language *)
|
||||
|
||||
(* Here's some appropriate syntax for expressions (side-effect-free) of a simple
|
||||
* imperatve language with a mutable memory. *)
|
||||
Inductive exp :=
|
||||
| Const (n : nat)
|
||||
| Var (x : string)
|
||||
| Read (e1 : exp)
|
||||
| Plus (e1 e2 : exp)
|
||||
| Minus (e1 e2 : exp)
|
||||
| Mult (e1 e2 : exp).
|
||||
|
||||
(* Those were the expressions of numeric type. Here are the Boolean
|
||||
* expressions. *)
|
||||
Inductive bexp :=
|
||||
| Equal (e1 e2 : exp)
|
||||
| Less (e1 e2 : exp).
|
||||
|
||||
Definition heap := fmap nat nat.
|
||||
Definition valuation := fmap var nat.
|
||||
Definition assertion := heap -> valuation -> Prop.
|
||||
|
||||
(* Here's the syntax of side-effecting commands, where we attach an assertion to
|
||||
* every "while" loop, for reasons that should become clear later. The
|
||||
* assertion is ignored in the operational semantics! *)
|
||||
Inductive cmd :=
|
||||
| Skip
|
||||
| Assign (x : var) (e : exp)
|
||||
| Write (e1 e2 : exp)
|
||||
| Seq (c1 c2 : cmd)
|
||||
| If_ (be : bexp) (then_ else_ : cmd)
|
||||
| While_ (inv : assertion) (be : bexp) (body : cmd)
|
||||
|
||||
(* And one more, which we'll use to characterize program correctness more
|
||||
* simply: *)
|
||||
| Assert (a : assertion).
|
||||
|
||||
Notation "m $! k" := (match m $? k with Some n => n | None => O end) (at level 30).
|
||||
|
||||
(* Start of expression semantics: meaning of expressions, as a function of
|
||||
* state *)
|
||||
Fixpoint eval (e : exp) (h : heap) (v : valuation) : nat :=
|
||||
match e with
|
||||
| Const n => n
|
||||
| Var x => v $! x
|
||||
| Read e1 => h $! eval e1 h v
|
||||
| Plus e1 e2 => eval e1 h v + eval e2 h v
|
||||
| Minus e1 e2 => eval e1 h v - eval e2 h v
|
||||
| Mult e1 e2 => eval e1 h v * eval e2 h v
|
||||
end.
|
||||
|
||||
(* Meaning of Boolean expressions *)
|
||||
Fixpoint beval (b : bexp) (h : heap) (v : valuation) : bool :=
|
||||
match b with
|
||||
| Equal e1 e2 => if eval e1 h v ==n eval e2 h v then true else false
|
||||
| Less e1 e2 => if eval e2 h v <=? eval e1 h v then false else true
|
||||
end.
|
||||
|
||||
(* A big-step operational semantics for commands *)
|
||||
Inductive exec : heap -> valuation -> cmd -> heap -> valuation -> Prop :=
|
||||
| ExSkip : forall h v,
|
||||
exec h v Skip h v
|
||||
| ExAssign : forall h v x e,
|
||||
exec h v (Assign x e) h (v $+ (x, eval e h v))
|
||||
| ExWrite : forall h v e1 e2,
|
||||
exec h v (Write e1 e2) (h $+ (eval e1 h v, eval e2 h v)) v
|
||||
| ExSeq : forall h1 v1 c1 h2 v2 c2 h3 v3,
|
||||
exec h1 v1 c1 h2 v2
|
||||
-> exec h2 v2 c2 h3 v3
|
||||
-> exec h1 v1 (Seq c1 c2) h3 v3
|
||||
| ExIfTrue : forall h1 v1 b c1 c2 h2 v2,
|
||||
beval b h1 v1 = true
|
||||
-> exec h1 v1 c1 h2 v2
|
||||
-> exec h1 v1 (If_ b c1 c2) h2 v2
|
||||
| ExIfFalse : forall h1 v1 b c1 c2 h2 v2,
|
||||
beval b h1 v1 = false
|
||||
-> exec h1 v1 c2 h2 v2
|
||||
-> exec h1 v1 (If_ b c1 c2) h2 v2
|
||||
| ExWhileFalse : forall I h v b c,
|
||||
beval b h v = false
|
||||
-> exec h v (While_ I b c) h v
|
||||
| ExWhileTrue : forall I h1 v1 b c h2 v2 h3 v3,
|
||||
beval b h1 v1 = true
|
||||
-> exec h1 v1 c h2 v2
|
||||
-> exec h2 v2 (While_ I b c) h3 v3
|
||||
-> exec h1 v1 (While_ I b c) h3 v3
|
||||
|
||||
(* Assertions execute only when they are true. *)
|
||||
| ExAssert : forall h v (a : assertion),
|
||||
a h v
|
||||
-> exec h v (Assert a) h v.
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
(** * Hoare logic *)
|
||||
|
||||
Inductive hoare_triple : assertion -> cmd -> assertion -> Prop :=
|
||||
| HtSkip : forall P, hoare_triple P Skip P
|
||||
| HtAssign : forall (P : assertion) x e,
|
||||
hoare_triple P (Assign x e) (fun h v => exists v', P h v' /\ v = v' $+ (x, eval e h v'))
|
||||
| HtWrite : forall (P : assertion) (e1 e2 : exp),
|
||||
hoare_triple P (Write e1 e2) (fun h v => exists h', P h' v /\ h = h' $+ (eval e1 h' v, eval e2 h' v))
|
||||
| HtSeq : forall (P Q R : assertion) c1 c2,
|
||||
hoare_triple P c1 Q
|
||||
-> hoare_triple Q c2 R
|
||||
-> hoare_triple P (Seq c1 c2) R
|
||||
| HtIf : forall (P Q1 Q2 : assertion) b c1 c2,
|
||||
hoare_triple (fun h v => P h v /\ beval b h v = true) c1 Q1
|
||||
-> hoare_triple (fun h v => P h v /\ beval b h v = false) c2 Q2
|
||||
-> hoare_triple P (If_ b c1 c2) (fun h v => Q1 h v \/ Q2 h v)
|
||||
| HtWhile : forall (I P : assertion) b c,
|
||||
(forall h v, P h v -> I h v)
|
||||
-> hoare_triple (fun h v => I h v /\ beval b h v = true) c I
|
||||
-> hoare_triple P (While_ I b c) (fun h v => I h v /\ beval b h v = false)
|
||||
| HtConsequence : forall (P Q P' Q' : assertion) c,
|
||||
hoare_triple P c Q
|
||||
-> (forall h v, P' h v -> P h v)
|
||||
-> (forall h v, Q h v -> Q' h v)
|
||||
-> hoare_triple P' c Q'.
|
||||
|
||||
Lemma hoare_triple_big_step_while: forall I b c,
|
||||
(forall h v h' v', I h v /\ beval b h v = true
|
||||
-> exec h v c h' v'
|
||||
-> I h' v')
|
||||
-> (forall h v h' v', exec h v c h' v'
|
||||
-> I h v
|
||||
-> beval b h v = true
|
||||
-> I h' v')
|
||||
-> forall h v h' v', exec h v (While_ I b c) h' v'
|
||||
-> I h v
|
||||
-> I h' v' /\ beval b h' v' = false.
|
||||
Proof.
|
||||
induct 3; eauto.
|
||||
Qed.
|
||||
|
||||
Theorem hoare_triple_big_step : forall pre c post,
|
||||
hoare_triple pre c post
|
||||
-> forall h v h' v', exec h v c h' v'
|
||||
-> pre h v
|
||||
-> post h' v'.
|
||||
Proof.
|
||||
induct 1; eauto; invert 1; eauto.
|
||||
|
||||
simplify.
|
||||
eapply hoare_triple_big_step_while; eauto.
|
||||
Qed.
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
(* BEGIN syntax macros that won't be explained *)
|
||||
Coercion Const : nat >-> exp.
|
||||
Coercion Var : string >-> exp.
|
||||
Notation "*[ e ]" := (Read e) : cmd_scope.
|
||||
Infix "+" := Plus : cmd_scope.
|
||||
Infix "-" := Minus : cmd_scope.
|
||||
Infix "*" := Mult : cmd_scope.
|
||||
Infix "=" := Equal : cmd_scope.
|
||||
Infix "<" := Less : cmd_scope.
|
||||
Definition set (dst src : exp) : cmd :=
|
||||
match dst with
|
||||
| Read dst' => Write dst' src
|
||||
| Var dst' => Assign dst' src
|
||||
| _ => Assign "Bad LHS" 0
|
||||
end.
|
||||
Infix "<-" := set (no associativity, at level 70) : cmd_scope.
|
||||
Infix ";;" := Seq (right associativity, at level 75) : cmd_scope.
|
||||
Notation "'when' b 'then' then_ 'else' else_ 'done'" := (If_ b then_ else_) (at level 75, e at level 0).
|
||||
Notation "{{ I }} 'while' b 'loop' body 'done'" := (While_ I b body) (at level 75).
|
||||
Delimit Scope cmd_scope with cmd.
|
||||
|
||||
Infix "+" := plus : reset_scope.
|
||||
Infix "-" := minus : reset_scope.
|
||||
Infix "*" := mult : reset_scope.
|
||||
Infix "=" := eq : reset_scope.
|
||||
Infix "<" := lt : reset_scope.
|
||||
Delimit Scope reset_scope with reset.
|
||||
Open Scope reset_scope.
|
||||
(* END macros *)
|
||||
|
||||
(* We should draw some attention to the next notation, which defines special
|
||||
* lambdas for writing assertions. *)
|
||||
Notation "h & v ~> e" := (fun h v => e%reset) (at level 85, v at level 0).
|
||||
|
||||
Notation "{{ P }} c {{ Q }}" := (hoare_triple P c%cmd Q) (at level 90, c at next level).
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
(** * Some examples of verified programs *)
|
||||
|
||||
(** ** Swapping the values in two variables *)
|
||||
|
||||
Ltac ht1 := apply HtSkip || apply HtAssign || apply HtWrite || eapply HtSeq
|
||||
|| eapply HtIf || eapply HtWhile
|
||||
|| match goal with
|
||||
| [ |- hoare_triple ?pre _ _ ] => eapply HtConsequence with (P := pre); [ | tauto | ]
|
||||
end.
|
||||
|
||||
Ltac ht := simplify; repeat ht1; cbv beta; propositional; subst;
|
||||
repeat match goal with
|
||||
| [ H : ex _ |- _ ] => invert H; propositional; subst
|
||||
end;
|
||||
simplify;
|
||||
repeat match goal with
|
||||
| [ _ : context[?a <=? ?b] |- _ ] => destruct (a <=? b); try discriminate
|
||||
| [ H : ?E = ?E |- _ ] => clear H
|
||||
end; simplify; propositional; auto; try linear_arithmetic.
|
||||
|
||||
Theorem swap_ok : forall a b,
|
||||
{{_&v ~> v $! "x" = a /\ v $! "y" = b}}
|
||||
"tmp" <- "x";;
|
||||
"x" <- "y";;
|
||||
"y" <- "tmp"
|
||||
{{_&v ~> v $! "x" = b /\ v $! "y" = a}}.
|
||||
Proof.
|
||||
ht.
|
||||
Qed.
|
||||
|
||||
(** ** Computing the maximum of two variables *)
|
||||
|
||||
Theorem max_ok : forall a b,
|
||||
{{_&v ~> v $! "x" = a /\ v $! "y" = b}}
|
||||
when "x" < "y" then
|
||||
"m" <- "y"
|
||||
else
|
||||
"m" <- "x"
|
||||
done
|
||||
{{_&v ~> v $! "m" = max a b}}.
|
||||
Proof.
|
||||
ht.
|
||||
Qed.
|
||||
|
||||
(** ** Iterative factorial *)
|
||||
|
||||
(* These two rewrite rules capture the definition of functional [fact], in
|
||||
* exactly the form useful in our Hoare-logic proof. *)
|
||||
Lemma fact_base : forall n,
|
||||
n = 0
|
||||
-> fact n = 1.
|
||||
Proof.
|
||||
simplify; subst; auto.
|
||||
Qed.
|
||||
|
||||
Hint Rewrite <- minus_n_O.
|
||||
|
||||
Lemma fact_rec : forall n,
|
||||
n > 0
|
||||
-> fact n = n * fact (n - 1).
|
||||
Proof.
|
||||
simplify; cases n; simplify; linear_arithmetic.
|
||||
Qed.
|
||||
|
||||
Hint Rewrite fact_base fact_rec using linear_arithmetic.
|
||||
|
||||
(* Note the careful choice of loop invariant below. It may look familiar from
|
||||
* earlier chapters' proofs! *)
|
||||
Theorem fact_ok : forall n,
|
||||
{{_&v ~> v $! "n" = n}}
|
||||
"acc" <- 1;;
|
||||
{{_&v ~> v $! "acc" * fact (v $! "n") = fact n}}
|
||||
while 0 < "n" loop
|
||||
"acc" <- "acc" * "n";;
|
||||
"n" <- "n" - 1
|
||||
done
|
||||
{{_&v ~> v $! "acc" = fact n}}.
|
||||
Proof.
|
||||
ht.
|
||||
ring [H0]. (* This variant of [ring] suggests a hypothesis to use in the
|
||||
* proof. *)
|
||||
Qed.
|
||||
|
||||
(** ** Selection sort *)
|
||||
|
||||
(* This is our one example of a program reading/writing memory, which holds the
|
||||
* representation of an array that we want to sort in-place. *)
|
||||
|
||||
(** One simple lemma turns out to be helpful to guide [auto] properly. *)
|
||||
Lemma leq_f : forall A (m : fmap A nat) x y,
|
||||
x = y
|
||||
-> m $! x <= m $! y.
|
||||
Proof.
|
||||
ht.
|
||||
Qed.
|
||||
|
||||
Hint Resolve leq_f.
|
||||
Hint Extern 1 (@eq nat _ _) => linear_arithmetic.
|
||||
Hint Extern 1 (_ < _) => linear_arithmetic.
|
||||
Hint Extern 1 (_ <= _) => linear_arithmetic.
|
||||
(* We also register [linear-arithmetic] as a step to try during proof search. *)
|
||||
|
||||
(* These invariants are fairly hairy, but probably the best way to understand
|
||||
* them is just to spend a while reading them. They generally talk about
|
||||
* sortedness of subsets of the array. See the final postcondition for how we
|
||||
* interpret a part of memory as an array. Also note that we only prove here
|
||||
* that the final array is sorted, *not* that it's a permutation of the original
|
||||
* array! (Exercise for the reader? I'm not sure how much work it would
|
||||
* take.) *)
|
||||
Theorem selectionSort_ok :
|
||||
{{_&_ ~> True}}
|
||||
"i" <- 0;;
|
||||
{{h&v ~> v $! "i" <= v $! "n"
|
||||
/\ (forall i j, i < j < v $! "i" -> h $! (v $! "a" + i) <= h $! (v $! "a" + j))
|
||||
/\ (forall i j, i < v $! "i" -> v $! "i" <= j < v $! "n" -> h $! (v $! "a" + i) <= h $! (v $! "a" + j)) }}
|
||||
while "i" < "n" loop
|
||||
"j" <- "i"+1;;
|
||||
"best" <- "i";;
|
||||
{{h&v ~> v $! "i" < v $! "j" <= v $! "n"
|
||||
/\ v $! "i" <= v $! "best" < v $! "n"
|
||||
/\ (forall k, v $! "i" <= k < v $! "j" -> h $! (v $! "a" + v $! "best") <= h $! (v $! "a" + k))
|
||||
/\ (forall i j, i < j < v $! "i" -> h $! (v $! "a" + i) <= h $! (v $! "a" + j))
|
||||
/\ (forall i j, i < v $! "i" -> v $! "i" <= j < v $! "n" -> h $! (v $! "a" + i) <= h $! (v $! "a" + j)) }}
|
||||
while "j" < "n" loop
|
||||
when *["a" + "j"] < *["a" + "best"] then
|
||||
"best" <- "j"
|
||||
else
|
||||
Skip
|
||||
done;;
|
||||
"j" <- "j" + 1
|
||||
done;;
|
||||
"tmp" <- *["a" + "best"];;
|
||||
*["a" + "best"] <- *["a" + "i"];;
|
||||
*["a" + "i"] <- "tmp";;
|
||||
"i" <- "i" + 1
|
||||
done
|
||||
{{h&v ~> forall i j, i < j < v $! "n" -> h $! (v $! "a" + i) <= h $! (v $! "a" + j)}}.
|
||||
Proof.
|
||||
ht; repeat match goal with
|
||||
| [ |- context[_ $+ (?a + ?x, _) $! (?a + ?y)] ] =>
|
||||
cases (x ==n y); ht
|
||||
end.
|
||||
|
||||
cases (k ==n x0 $! "j"); ht.
|
||||
specialize (H k); ht.
|
||||
|
||||
cases (k ==n x $! "j"); ht.
|
||||
Qed.
|
||||
Loading…
Reference in a new issue