mirror of
https://github.com/achlipala/frap.git
synced 2024-11-10 00:07:51 +00:00
321 lines
8 KiB
Coq
321 lines
8 KiB
Coq
Require Import Frap.
|
|
|
|
|
|
(* We begin with a return to our arithmetic language from the last chapter,
|
|
* adding subtraction*, which will come in handy later.
|
|
* *: good pun, right? *)
|
|
Inductive arith : Set :=
|
|
| Const (n : nat)
|
|
| Var (x : var)
|
|
| Plus (e1 e2 : arith)
|
|
| Minus (e1 e2 : arith)
|
|
| Times (e1 e2 : arith).
|
|
|
|
Example ex1 := Const 42.
|
|
Example ex2 := Plus (Var "y") (Times (Var "x") (Const 3)).
|
|
|
|
Definition valuation := fmap var nat.
|
|
(* A valuation is a finite map from [var] to [nat]. *)
|
|
|
|
(* The interpreter is a fairly innocuous-looking recursive function. *)
|
|
Fixpoint interp (e : arith) (v : valuation) : nat :=
|
|
match e with
|
|
| Const n => n
|
|
| Var x =>
|
|
(* Note use of infix operator to look up a key in a finite map. *)
|
|
match v $? x with
|
|
| None => 0 (* goofy default value! *)
|
|
| Some n => n
|
|
end
|
|
| Plus e1 e2 => interp e1 v + interp e2 v
|
|
| Minus e1 e2 => interp e1 v - interp e2 v
|
|
(* For anyone who's wondering: this [-] sticks at 0,
|
|
* if we would otherwise underflow. *)
|
|
| Times e1 e2 => interp e1 v * interp e2 v
|
|
end.
|
|
|
|
(* Here's an example valuation, using an infix operator for map extension. *)
|
|
Definition valuation0 : valuation :=
|
|
$0 $+ ("x", 17) $+ ("y", 3).
|
|
|
|
Theorem interp_ex1 : interp ex1 valuation0 = 42.
|
|
Proof.
|
|
simplify.
|
|
equality.
|
|
Qed.
|
|
|
|
Theorem interp_ex2 : interp ex2 valuation0 = 54.
|
|
Proof.
|
|
unfold valuation0.
|
|
simplify.
|
|
equality.
|
|
Qed.
|
|
|
|
(* Here's the silly transformation we defined last time. *)
|
|
Fixpoint commuter (e : arith) : arith :=
|
|
match e with
|
|
| Const _ => e
|
|
| Var _ => e
|
|
| Plus e1 e2 => Plus (commuter e2) (commuter e1)
|
|
| Minus e1 e2 => Minus (commuter e1) (commuter e2)
|
|
(* ^-- NB: didn't change the operand order here! *)
|
|
| Times e1 e2 => Times (commuter e2) (commuter e1)
|
|
end.
|
|
|
|
(* Instead of proving various odds-and-ends properties about it,
|
|
* let's show what we *really* care about: it preserves the
|
|
* *meanings* of expressions! *)
|
|
Theorem commuter_ok : forall v e, interp (commuter e) v = interp e v.
|
|
Proof.
|
|
Admitted.
|
|
|
|
(* Let's also revisit substitution. *)
|
|
Fixpoint substitute (inThis : arith) (replaceThis : var) (withThis : arith) : arith :=
|
|
match inThis with
|
|
| Const _ => inThis
|
|
| Var x => if x ==v replaceThis then withThis else inThis
|
|
| Plus e1 e2 => Plus (substitute e1 replaceThis withThis) (substitute e2 replaceThis withThis)
|
|
| Minus e1 e2 => Minus (substitute e1 replaceThis withThis) (substitute e2 replaceThis withThis)
|
|
| Times e1 e2 => Times (substitute e1 replaceThis withThis) (substitute e2 replaceThis withThis)
|
|
end.
|
|
|
|
(* How should we state a correctness property for [substitute]?
|
|
Theorem substitute_ok : forall v replaceThis withThis inThis,
|
|
...
|
|
Proof.
|
|
|
|
Qed.*)
|
|
|
|
(* Let's also defined a pared-down version of the expression-simplificaton
|
|
* functions from last chapter. *)
|
|
Fixpoint doSomeArithmetic (e : arith) : arith :=
|
|
match e with
|
|
| Const _ => e
|
|
| Var _ => e
|
|
| Plus (Const n1) (Const n2) => Const (n1 + n2)
|
|
| Plus e1 e2 => Plus (doSomeArithmetic e1) (doSomeArithmetic e2)
|
|
| Minus e1 e2 => Minus (doSomeArithmetic e1) (doSomeArithmetic e2)
|
|
| Times (Const n1) (Const n2) => Const (n1 * n2)
|
|
| Times e1 e2 => Times (doSomeArithmetic e1) (doSomeArithmetic e2)
|
|
end.
|
|
|
|
Theorem doSomeArithmetic_ok : forall e v, interp (doSomeArithmetic e) v = interp e v.
|
|
Proof.
|
|
Admitted.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(* Of course, we're going to get bored if we confine ourselves to arithmetic
|
|
* expressions for the rest of our journey. Let's get a bit fancier and define
|
|
* a *stack machine*, related to postfix calculators that some of you may have
|
|
* experienced. *)
|
|
Inductive instruction :=
|
|
| PushConst (n : nat)
|
|
| PushVar (x : var)
|
|
| Add
|
|
| Subtract
|
|
| Multiply.
|
|
|
|
(* What does it all mean? An interpreter tells us unambiguously! *)
|
|
Definition run1 (i : instruction) (v : valuation) (stack : list nat) : list nat :=
|
|
match i with
|
|
| PushConst n => n :: stack
|
|
| PushVar x => (match v $? x with
|
|
| None => 0
|
|
| Some n => n
|
|
end) :: stack
|
|
| Add =>
|
|
match stack with
|
|
| arg2 :: arg1 :: stack' => arg1 + arg2 :: stack'
|
|
| _ => stack (* arbitrary behavior in erroneous case (stack underflow) *)
|
|
end
|
|
| Subtract =>
|
|
match stack with
|
|
| arg2 :: arg1 :: stack' => arg1 - arg2 :: stack'
|
|
| _ => stack (* arbitrary behavior in erroneous case *)
|
|
end
|
|
| Multiply =>
|
|
match stack with
|
|
| arg2 :: arg1 :: stack' => arg1 * arg2 :: stack'
|
|
| _ => stack (* arbitrary behavior in erroneous case *)
|
|
end
|
|
end.
|
|
|
|
(* That function explained how to run one instruction.
|
|
* Here's how to run several of them. *)
|
|
Fixpoint run (is : list instruction) (v : valuation) (stack : list nat) : list nat :=
|
|
match is with
|
|
| nil => stack
|
|
| i :: is' => run is' v (run1 i v stack)
|
|
end.
|
|
|
|
(* Instead of writing fiddly stack programs ourselves, let's *compile*
|
|
* arithmetic expressions into equivalent stack programs. *)
|
|
Fixpoint compile (e : arith) : list instruction :=
|
|
match e with
|
|
| Const n => PushConst n :: nil
|
|
| Var x => PushVar x :: nil
|
|
| Plus e1 e2 => compile e1 ++ compile e2 ++ Add :: nil
|
|
| Minus e1 e2 => compile e1 ++ compile e2 ++ Subtract :: nil
|
|
| Times e1 e2 => compile e1 ++ compile e2 ++ Multiply :: nil
|
|
end.
|
|
|
|
Theorem compile_ok : forall e v, run (compile e) v nil = interp e v :: nil.
|
|
Proof.
|
|
Admitted.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(* Let's get a bit fancier, moving toward the level of general-purpose
|
|
* imperative languages. Here's a language of commands, building on the
|
|
* language of expressions we have defined. *)
|
|
Inductive cmd :=
|
|
| Skip
|
|
| Assign (x : var) (e : arith)
|
|
| Sequence (c1 c2 : cmd)
|
|
| Repeat (e : arith) (body : cmd).
|
|
|
|
Fixpoint selfCompose {A} (f : A -> A) (n : nat) : A -> A :=
|
|
match n with
|
|
| O => fun x => x
|
|
| S n' => fun x => selfCompose f n' (f x)
|
|
end.
|
|
|
|
Fixpoint exec (c : cmd) (v : valuation) : valuation :=
|
|
match c with
|
|
| Skip => v
|
|
| Assign x e => v $+ (x, interp e v)
|
|
| Sequence c1 c2 => exec c2 (exec c1 v)
|
|
| Repeat e body => selfCompose (exec body) (interp e v) v
|
|
end.
|
|
|
|
(* Let's define some programs and prove that they operate in certain ways. *)
|
|
|
|
Example factorial_ugly :=
|
|
Sequence
|
|
(Assign "output" (Const 1))
|
|
(Repeat (Var "input")
|
|
(Sequence
|
|
(Assign "output" (Times (Var "output") (Var "input")))
|
|
(Assign "input" (Minus (Var "input") (Const 1))))).
|
|
|
|
(* Ouch; that code is hard to read. Let's introduce some notations to make the
|
|
* concrete syntax more palatable. We won't explain the general mechanisms on
|
|
* display here, but see the Coq manual for details, or try to reverse-engineer
|
|
* them from our examples. *)
|
|
Coercion Const : nat >-> arith.
|
|
Coercion Var : var >-> arith.
|
|
Infix "+" := Plus : arith_scope.
|
|
Infix "-" := Minus : arith_scope.
|
|
Infix "*" := Times : arith_scope.
|
|
Delimit Scope arith_scope with arith.
|
|
Notation "x <- e" := (Assign x e%arith) (at level 75).
|
|
Infix ";" := Sequence (at level 76).
|
|
Notation "'repeat' e 'doing' body 'done'" := (Repeat e%arith body) (at level 75).
|
|
|
|
(* OK, let's try that program again. *)
|
|
Example factorial :=
|
|
"output" <- 1;
|
|
repeat "input" doing
|
|
"output" <- "output" * "input";
|
|
"input" <- "input" - 1
|
|
done.
|
|
|
|
(* Now we prove that it really computes factorial.
|
|
* First, a reference implementation as a functional program. *)
|
|
Fixpoint fact (n : nat) : nat :=
|
|
match n with
|
|
| O => 1
|
|
| S n' => n * fact n'
|
|
end.
|
|
|
|
Theorem factorial_ok : forall v input,
|
|
v $? "input" = Some input
|
|
-> exec factorial v $? "output" = Some (fact input).
|
|
Proof.
|
|
Admitted.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(* One last example: let's try to do loop unrolling, for constant iteration
|
|
* counts. That is, we can duplicate the loop body instead of using an explicit
|
|
* loop. *)
|
|
|
|
(* This obvious-sounding fact will come in handy: self-composition gives the
|
|
* same result, when passed two functions that map equal inputs to equal
|
|
* outputs. *)
|
|
Lemma selfCompose_extensional : forall {A} (f g : A -> A) n x,
|
|
(forall y, f y = g y)
|
|
-> selfCompose f n x = selfCompose g n x.
|
|
Proof.
|
|
induct n; simplify; try equality.
|
|
|
|
rewrite H.
|
|
apply IHn.
|
|
trivial.
|
|
Qed.
|
|
|
|
(*Theorem unroll_ok : forall c v, exec (unroll c) v = exec c v.
|
|
Proof.
|
|
|
|
Qed.*)
|