Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

[Merged by Bors] - feat(tactic/push_neg): option for an alternate normal form of ¬ (P ∧ Q) #16586

Closed
wants to merge 1 commit into from

Conversation

hrmacbeth
Copy link
Member

Backport a feature of the mathlib4 version of push_neg: an option to make ¬ (P ∧ Q) be normalized to ¬ P ∨ ¬ Q, rather than P → ¬ Q. That was actually the original behaviour, but it was changed in #3362.

I have implemented this as a global option trace.push_neg.use_distrib (using the tracing option hack) rather than as a piece of configuration information which is passed when using the tactic, because I imagine this feature will mostly be used in teaching (that was both my motivation and also @PatrickMassot's when he wrote the original version), where it is convenient to "set it and forget it". This is also how it is implemented in the mathlib4 version (cc @dupuisf @j-loreaux).

Zulip:
https://leanprover.zulipchat.com/#narrow/stream/239415-metaprogramming-.2F-tactics/topic/alternative.20normal.20form.20for.20push_neg


Open in Gitpod

@hrmacbeth hrmacbeth added t-meta Tactics, attributes or user commands awaiting-CI The author would like to see what CI has to say before doing more work. modifies-tactic-syntax This PR adds a new interactive tactic or modifies the syntax of an existing tactic. labels Sep 21, 2022
@github-actions github-actions bot removed the awaiting-CI The author would like to see what CI has to say before doing more work. label Sep 22, 2022
@hrmacbeth hrmacbeth added the awaiting-review The author would like community review of the PR label Sep 22, 2022
@fpvandoorn
Copy link
Member

LGTM

bors merge

@github-actions github-actions bot added ready-to-merge All that is left is for bors to build and merge this PR. (Remember you need to say `bors r+`.) and removed awaiting-review The author would like community review of the PR labels Sep 28, 2022
bors bot pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Sep 28, 2022
… Q)` (#16586)

Backport a feature of the [mathlib4 version](leanprover-community/mathlib4#344) of `push_neg`: an option to make `¬ (P ∧ Q)` be normalized to `¬ P ∨ ¬ Q`, rather than `P → ¬ Q`.  That was actually the original behaviour, but it was changed in  #3362.

I have implemented this as a global option `trace.push_neg.use_distrib` (using the [tracing option hack](https://leanprover.zulipchat.com/#narrow/stream/113488-general/topic/custom.20options)) rather than as a piece of configuration information which is passed when using the tactic, because I imagine this feature will mostly be used in teaching (that was both my motivation and also @PatrickMassot's when he wrote the original version), where it is convenient to "set it and forget it".  This is also how it is implemented in the mathlib4 version (cc @dupuisf @j-loreaux).

Zulip:
https://leanprover.zulipchat.com/#narrow/stream/239415-metaprogramming-.2F-tactics/topic/alternative.20normal.20form.20for.20push_neg
@bors
Copy link

bors bot commented Sep 29, 2022

Pull request successfully merged into master.

Build succeeded:

@bors bors bot changed the title feat(tactic/push_neg): option for an alternate normal form of ¬ (P ∧ Q) [Merged by Bors] - feat(tactic/push_neg): option for an alternate normal form of ¬ (P ∧ Q) Sep 29, 2022
@bors bors bot closed this Sep 29, 2022
@bors bors bot deleted the push_neg_option branch September 29, 2022 01:02
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
modifies-tactic-syntax This PR adds a new interactive tactic or modifies the syntax of an existing tactic. ready-to-merge All that is left is for bors to build and merge this PR. (Remember you need to say `bors r+`.) t-meta Tactics, attributes or user commands
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

2 participants