Don't make too many coercions reversible by default #18705
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
proux01
added
kind: fix
|
Cc @ggonthier who noticed the issue |
coqbot-app
bot
added
the
needs: full CI
proux01
added
request: full CI
proux01
force-pushed
the
fix_reversible_coercion
branch
from
9d6c5c6
to
429a53a
Compare
coqbot-app
bot
removed
request: full CI
|
🔴 CI failure at commit 429a53a without any failure in the test-suite ✔️ Corresponding job for the base commit 954e315 succeeded ❔ Ask me to try to extract a minimal test case that can be added to the test-suite 🏃
|
proux01
added a commit
to proux01/UniMath
that referenced
this pull request
Feb 24, 2024
proux01
added a commit
to proux01/UniMath
that referenced
this pull request
Feb 27, 2024
nmvdw
added a commit
to UniMath/UniMath
that referenced
this pull request
Feb 28, 2024
Adapt to coq/coq#18705 This is backward compatible (down to Coq 8.16). Co-authored-by: Niels van der Weide <nnmvdw@gmail.com>
The doc reads > By default coercions are not reversible > except for Record fields specified using :>. The previous code was making way too many coercion reversible by default. The new behavior should be closer from the spec in the doc.
proux01
added
the
request: full CI
proux01
force-pushed
the
fix_reversible_coercion
branch
from
429a53a
to
25e9d2a
Compare
coqbot-app
bot
removed
the
request: full CI
|
@coq/vernac-maintainers this is ready, CI green |
SkySkimmer
approved these changes
Mar 1, 2024
| @@ -32,7 +32,7 @@ let declare_variable is_coe ~kind typ univs imps impl name = | |||
| let () = | |||
| if is_coe = Vernacexpr.AddCoercion then | |||
| ComCoercion.try_add_new_coercion | |||
| r ~local:true ~reversible:true in | |||
| r ~local:true ~reversible:false in | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Should reversible be optional (defaulting to false)?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Probably yes. I guess, my initial intent in not making optional was to avoid forgetting a callsite. But I managed to screw up anyway, so that was probably a bad choice.
Comment on lines
+8
to
+9
| The previous code was making way too many coercion reversible by default. | ||
| The new behavior should be closer from the spec in the doc |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This is less formal language than usual but I don't mind.
|
@coqbot merge now |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
The doc reads
The previous code was making some other coercions (particularly
Coercion foo := bar.but notCoercion foo : bar >-> baz.) reversible by default. The new behavior should be closer from the spec in the doc.Added / updated documentation.Documented any new / changed user messages.Updated documented syntax by runningmake doc_gram_rsts.Overlay (to be merged before the current PR)