forked from LPCIC/coq-elpi
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 0
/
example_reflexive_tactic.v
293 lines (239 loc) · 8.78 KB
/
example_reflexive_tactic.v
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
182
183
184
185
186
187
188
189
190
191
192
193
194
195
196
197
198
199
200
201
202
203
204
205
206
207
208
209
210
211
212
213
214
215
216
217
218
219
220
221
222
223
224
225
226
227
228
229
230
231
232
233
234
235
236
237
238
239
240
241
242
243
244
245
246
247
248
249
250
251
252
253
254
255
256
257
258
259
260
261
262
263
264
265
266
267
268
269
270
271
272
273
274
275
276
277
278
279
280
281
282
283
284
285
286
287
288
289
290
291
292
293
(**
This file builds a reflexive tactic solving equalities in a monoid.
We use elpi to:
- reify an expression into a syntax tree
- query a Db of known monoids
- call a few ltac primitives in order to apply the corrctness theorem
*)
From elpi Require elpi.
Require Arith ZArith Psatz List ssreflect.
Import elpi.
Import Arith ZArith Psatz List ssreflect.
(* This module contains the reflexive normalizer and its correctness proof *)
Module MonoidTheory.
(* The syntax of terms *)
Inductive lang :=
| var (i : nat) (* i-th variable in the context *)
| zero : lang (* Neutral element *)
| add (x y : lang). (* binary operation *)
(* Interpretation to T *)
Fixpoint interp T (e : T) (op : T -> T -> T) (gamma : list T) (t : lang) : T :=
match t with
| var v => nth v gamma e
| zero => e
| add x y => op (interp T e op gamma x) (interp T e op gamma y)
end.
(* normalization of parentheses and units *)
Fixpoint normAx t1 acc :=
match t1 with
| add t1 t2 => normAx t1 (normAx t2 acc)
| _ => add t1 acc
end.
Fixpoint normA t :=
match t with
| add s1 s2 => normAx s1 (normA s2)
| _ => t
end.
Fixpoint norm1 t :=
match t with
| var _ => t
| zero => t
| add t1 t2 =>
match norm1 t1 with
| zero => norm1 t2
| t1 =>
match norm1 t2 with
| zero => t1
| t2 => add t1 t2
end
end
end.
Definition norm t := normA (norm1 t).
(* Correctness theorem. This is not the point of this demo, please don't
look at the proofs ;-) *)
Section assoc_reflection_proofs.
Variable T : Type.
Variable unit : T.
Variable op : T -> T -> T.
Hypothesis op_assoc : forall a b c, op a (op b c) = op (op a b) c.
Hypothesis unit_l : forall a, op unit a = a.
Hypothesis unit_r : forall a, op a unit = a.
Lemma normAxA t1 t2 : normAx t1 (normA t2) = normA (add t1 t2).
Proof. by []. Qed.
Lemma normAx_add {t1 t2 s} : normAx t1 t2 = s -> exists s1 s2, s = add s1 s2.
Proof.
elim: t1 t2 s => /= [i||w1 H1 w2 H2] t2 s <-; try by do 2 eexists; reflexivity.
by case E: (normAx _ _); case/H1: E => s1 [s2 ->]; do 2 eexists; reflexivity.
Qed.
Lemma norm1_zero {l t} : norm1 t = zero -> interp T unit op l t = unit.
Proof.
by elim: t => [||s1 + s2] //=; case E1: (norm1 s1); case E2: (norm1 s2) => //= -> // ->.
Qed.
Lemma norm_zero {l t} : norm t = zero -> interp T unit op l t = unit.
Proof.
rewrite /norm; case E: (norm1 t) => [||x y] //; first by rewrite (norm1_zero E).
by move/normAx_add=> [] ? [].
Qed.
Lemma norm1_var {l t j} : norm1 t = var j -> interp T unit op l t = nth j l unit.
Proof.
elim: t => [i [->]||s1 + s2] //=; case E1: (norm1 s1); case E2: (norm1 s2) => //=.
by rewrite (norm1_zero E2) unit_r => + _ H => ->.
by rewrite (norm1_zero E1) unit_l => _ + H => ->.
Qed.
Lemma norm_var {l t j} : norm t = var j -> interp T unit op l t = nth j l unit.
Proof.
rewrite /norm; case E: (norm1 t); rewrite /= ?(norm1_var E) //; first by move=> [->].
by move/normAx_add=> [] ? [].
Qed.
Lemma norm1_add {l t s1 s2} : norm1 t = add s1 s2 -> interp T unit op l t = op (interp T unit op l s1) (interp T unit op l s2).
Proof.
elim: t s1 s2 => [||w1 + w2 + s1 s2] //=.
by case E1: (norm1 w1); case E2: (norm1 w2) => //= ++ [<- <-] /=;
do 2! [ move=> /(_ _ _ (refl_equal _)) -> | move=> _];
rewrite ?(norm1_zero E1) ?(norm1_zero E2) ?(norm1_var E1) ?(norm1_var E2).
Qed.
Lemma normAxP {l t1 t2} : interp T unit op l (normAx t1 t2) = op (interp T unit op l t1) (interp T unit op l t2).
Proof. by elim: t1 t2 => [||s1 Hs1 s2 Hs2] t2 //=; rewrite Hs1 Hs2 !op_assoc. Qed.
Lemma normAP {l} t : interp T unit op l (normA t) = interp T unit op l t.
Proof. by elim: t => //= x Hx y Hy; rewrite normAxP Hy. Qed.
Lemma norm_add {l t s1 s2} : norm t = add s1 s2 -> interp T unit op l t = op (interp T unit op l s1) (interp T unit op l s2).
Proof.
rewrite /norm; case E: (norm1 t) => [||x y]; rewrite //= (norm1_add E).
elim: x y s1 s2 {E} => //= [>[<- <- //=]|>[<- <-]|x + y + w s1 s2]; rewrite ?normAP //= ?unit_l //.
by rewrite normAxA -!op_assoc => ++ E => /(_ _ _ _ E) ->.
Qed.
Lemma normP_ l t1 t2 : norm t1 = norm t2 -> interp T unit op l t1 = interp T unit op l t2.
Proof.
case E: (norm t2) => [?||??] => [/norm_var|/norm_zero|/norm_add] ->.
by rewrite (norm_var E).
by rewrite (norm_zero E).
by rewrite (norm_add E).
Qed.
End assoc_reflection_proofs.
End MonoidTheory.
(* Finally, let's build the tactic *)
Import MonoidTheory.
(* This is the correctness theorem of our normalizer *)
Definition normP {T e op gamma t1 t2} p1 p2 p3 H := @normP_ T e op p1 p2 p3 gamma t1 t2 H.
About normP.
Open Scope Z_scope.
Goal forall x y z t, (x + y) + (z + 0 + t) = x + (y + z) + t.
Proof.
intros.
change (interp Z Z.zero Z.add (x::y::z::t::nil)
(add (add (var 0) (var 1)) (add (add (var 2) zero) (var 3)))
=
interp Z Z.zero Z.add (x::y::z::t::nil)
(add (add (var 0) (add (var 1) (var 2))) (var 3))).
apply: normP Z.add_assoc Z.add_0_l Z.add_0_r _.
reflexivity.
Qed.
(** Now, let's implement a tactic that does for us:
- the change step (reification)
- apply the correctness lemma
*)
(* This is for later *)
Elpi Db monoid.db lp:{{
pred is_monoid
i:term, % type
o:term, % zero
o:term, % op
o:term, % assoc
o:term, % unit_l
o:term. % unit_r
}}.
Elpi Tactic monoid.
Elpi Accumulate Db monoid.db.
Elpi Accumulate lp:{{
% [mem L X N] asserts that X is at position N in L.
% The list is open-ended, that is it terminates with an Elpi unification
% variable, so that the list can be extended with new elements if needed.
% e.g. mem (3 :: L) 4 N ---> L = 4 :: L1, N = 1
% Note: we build a Coq list, since we have to generate that anyway. We could
% use an Elpi list or any other data structure here, but then we would need
% to convert back anyway.
pred mem o:term, o:term, o:term.
mem {{ lp:X :: _ }} X {{ O }} :- !.
mem {{ _ :: lp:XS }} X {{ S lp:N }} :- mem XS X N.
% Give that [mem] works with open ended lists we need a way to close it (assign
% nil to the tail) at the very end of reification.
pred close o:term.
close {{ nil }} :- !.
close {{ _ :: lp:XS }} :- close XS.
% [quote Zero Op T AstT L] recognizes Zero and Op in T and generates the
% corresponding AstT using the "context" L for variables standing for
% terms that are not Zero nor Op
pred quote i:term, i:term, i:term, o:term, o:term.
quote Zero Op {{ lp:Op lp:T1 lp:T2 }} {{ add lp:R1 lp:R2 }} L :- !,
quote Zero Op T1 R1 L,
quote Zero Op T2 R2 L.
quote Zero _ Zero {{ zero }} _ :- !.
quote _ _ T {{ var lp:R }} L :- mem L T R.
% This preliminary version of the tactic takes as arguments the monoid signature
% and changes the goal [A = B] into [interp L AstA = interp L AstB]
solve (goal _ _ {{ @eq lp:T lp:A lp:B }} _ [trm Zero, trm Op] as G) GS :-
quote Zero Op A AstA L,
quote Zero Op B AstB L,
close L,
% We are very low level here, we assign a term directly to the goal handler
% while one could use ltac primitives (as we do later)
Ty = {{ (interp lp:T lp:Zero lp:Op lp:L lp:AstA)
= (interp lp:T lp:Zero lp:Op lp:L lp:AstB) }},
% This implements the "change" tactic
refine {{ (_ : lp:Ty) }} G GS.
:name "error"
solve _ _ :- coq.error "Not an equality / no signature provided".
}}.
Elpi Typecheck.
Tactic Notation "monoid" constr(zero) constr(add) := elpi monoid (zero) (add).
(** Let's test the tactic *)
Goal forall x y z t, (x + y) + (z + 0 + t) = x + (y + z) + t.
Proof.
intros.
monoid 0 Z.add.
(* OK, the goal was reified for us, we can use normP now *)
apply: normP Z.add_assoc Z.add_0_l Z.add_0_r _.
reflexivity.
Qed.
(** Now let's register in the Db the monoid for Z *)
Elpi Accumulate monoid.db lp:{{
is_monoid {{ Z }}
{{ 0 }} {{ Z.add }}
{{ Z.add_assoc }} {{ Z.add_0_l }} {{ Z.add_0_r }}.
}}.
(** Now let's improve the tactic. This time we don't expect the signature but
rather look it up in the Db. *)
Ltac my_compute := vm_compute.
Elpi Accumulate monoid lp:{{
:before "error"
solve (goal _ _ {{ @eq lp:T lp:A lp:B }} _ [] as G) GL :-
is_monoid T Zero Op Assoc Ul Ur,
quote Zero Op A AstA L,
quote Zero Op B AstB L,
close L,
% This time we use higher level combinators, closer to the standard ltac1 ones
refine {{ @normP lp:T lp:Zero lp:Op lp:L lp:AstA lp:AstB lp:Assoc lp:Ul lp:Ur _ }} G [SubG],
coq.ltac.thenl [
coq.ltac "my_compute", % https://github.com/coq/coq/issues/10769
coq.ltac "reflexivity",
] SubG GL.
}}.
Elpi Typecheck.
Tactic Notation "monoid" := elpi monoid.
(** Let's test it once more *)
Goal forall x y z t, (x + y) + (z + 0 + t) = x + (y + z) + t.
Proof.
intros.
monoid.
Show Proof.
Qed.
Elpi Accumulate monoid.db lp:{{
is_monoid {{ Z }}
{{ 1 }} {{ Z.mul }}
{{ Z.mul_assoc }} {{ Z.mul_1_l }} {{ Z.mul_1_r }}.
}}.
Goal forall x y z t, (x * y) * (1 * (z + t)) = x * y * (z + t).
Proof.
intros.
monoid.
Qed.