Abstract
We propose a new tactic language for the system Coq, which is intended to enrich the current tactic combinators (tacticals). This language is based on a functional core with recursors and matching operators for Coq terms but also for proof contexts. It can be used directly in proof scripts or in toplevel definitions (tactic definitions). We show that the implementation of this language involves considerable changes in the interpretation of proof scripts, essentially due to the matching operators. We give some examples which solve small proof parts locally and some others which deal with non-trivial problems. Finally, we discuss the status of this meta-language with respect to the Coq language and the implementation language of Coq.
INRIA-Rocquencourt, domaine de Voluceau, B.P. 105, 78153 Le Chesnay Cedex, France.
The word “proof” is rather overloaded and can be used in several ways. Here, we use “proof” for a script to be presented to a machine for checking.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Bruno Barras et al. The Coq Proof Assistant Reference Manual Version 6.3.1. INRIA-Rocquencourt, May 2000. http://coq.inria.fr/doc-eng.html. 86
Yann Coscoy. A natural language explanation for formal proofs. In C. Retoré, editor, Proceedings of Int. Conf. on Logical Aspects of Computational Liguistics (LACL), Nancy, volume 1328. Springer-Verlag LNCS/LNAI, September 1996. 85
Roberto Di Cosmo. Isomorphisms of Types: from λ-calculus to information retrieval and language design. Progress in Theoretical Computer Science. Birkhauser, 1995. ISBN-0-8176-3763-X. 92
Roy Dyckhoff. Contraction-free sequent calculi for intuitionistic logic. In The Journal of Symbolic Logic, volume 57(3), September 1992. 91
M. J. C. Gordon and T. F. Melham. Introduction to HOL: a Theorem ProvingEnvironment for Higher Order Logic. Cambridge University Press, 1993. 86
M. J. C. Gordon, R. Milner, and C. P. Wadsworth. Edinburgh LCF: a mechanised logic of computation. In Lectures Notes in Computer Science, volume 78. Springer-Verlag, 1979. 86
John Harrison. Proof style. In Eduardo Giménez and Christine Paulin-Mohring, editors, Types for Proofs and Programs: International Workshop TYPES’96, volume 1512 of LNCS, pages 154–172, Aussois, France, 1996. Springer-Verlag. 85
Xavier Leroy et al. The Objective Caml system release 3.00. INRIA-Rocquencourt, April 2000. http://caml.inria.fr/ocaml/htmlman/. 87
César Muñoz. Démonstration automatique dans la logique propositionnelle intuitionniste. Mémoire du DEA d'informatique fondamentale, Université Paris 7, Septembre 1994. 91
Sam Owre, Natarajan Shankar, and John Rushby. PVS: A prototype verification system. In Proceedings of CADE 11, Saratoga Springs, New York, June 1992. 85
Don Syme. Declarative Theorem Proving for Operational Semantics. PhD thesis, University of Cambridge, 1998. 85
Andrzej Trybulec. The Mizar-QC/6000 logic information language. In ALLC Bulletin (Association for Literary and Linguistic Computing), volume 6, pages 136–140, 1978. 85
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2000 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg
About this paper
Cite this paper
Delahaye, D. (2000). A Tactic Language for the System Coq. In: Parigot, M., Voronkov, A. (eds) Logic for Programming and Automated Reasoning. LPAR 2000. Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence(), vol 1955. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-44404-1_7
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-44404-1_7
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Print ISBN: 978-3-540-41285-4
Online ISBN: 978-3-540-44404-6
eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive