fix: wp_rec keeps the evaluation context flat - #657
Merged
MackieLoeffel merged 4 commits intoAug 20, 2026
Conversation
Collaborator
|
Thanks for the PR! I slightly refactored the PR to make iWPPure more generic, but otherwise it looks great! |
This file contains hidden or 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
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be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.
Description
This PR fully addresses #603 and is comprised of two commits:
wp_match,wp_seq, andwp_letto usewp_pure (_ _)instead ofwp_recbecause they do not require unfolding. This fixes the first part ofwp_recsplits the goal viawp_bindwhere Rocq keeps it flat #603 even without redefinition ofwp_recbut is still an arguably cleaner path since the unfolding route does not need to be invoked.wp_pureinto a shared core withwp_recthat takes anunfoldHeadparameter and redefineswp_recon top of it.wp_recthus no longer callswp_bindand leaves a flat goal like the Rocq counterpart. This fixes the second part of #603Checklist
authorssection of any appropriate filesGenerative AI Guidelines
AI assistance is permitted when making contributions to Iris-Lean, however, generative AI systems tend to produce code which takes a long time to review.
Please carefully review your code to ensure it meets the following standards.
havestatements that do not aid readability or code reuse should be inlined.In our experience, a good place to begin refactoring is by re-arranging and combining independent tactic invocations.
We also find that pointing generative AI systems to the Mathlib code style guidelines can help them perform some of this refactoring work.