-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 333
Add @[proof_condition] attribute for conditional formal proofs #4368
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
Open
williamjblair
wants to merge
5
commits into
google-deepmind:main
Choose a base branch
from
williamjblair:proof-condition-attribute
base: main
Could not load branches
Branch not found: {{ refName }}
Loading
Could not load tags
Nothing to show
Loading
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Some commits from the old base branch may be removed from the timeline,
and old review comments may become outdated.
+184
−25
Open
Changes from 2 commits
Commits
Show all changes
5 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
41735ef
Add @[proof_condition] attribute for conditional formal proofs
williamjblair b825546
Fix proof condition metadata extraction
williamjblair d0ec99c
Rework as conditional formal_proof ... assuming <hypothesis decls>
williamjblair 52d4a49
Add conditional formal proof attribute tests
williamjblair 5c61432
ci: retrigger after runner disk exhaustion (No space left on device, …
williamjblair File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
Some comments aren't visible on the classic Files Changed page.
There are no files selected for viewing
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
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
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
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
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
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
Oops, something went wrong.
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.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Hey! I think this is a nice idea! How about instead modifying the
formal_proofattribute to have an optionalconditionalkeyword in front - this would allow us to write e.g.conditional formal_proof ....There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
in some sense it would also be nice to store exactly what the hypothesis used is, since that should be relatively short, perhaps we could add those statements to the file (with a sorry proof of course) and then add the declaration name to the attribute?!
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Thanks @Paul-Lez , agreed!
conditionalis now a modifier onformal_proofitself (with no separate attribute), so it reads@[conditional formal_proof using lean4 at "<link>" assuming grh].conditionalwithoutassumingerrors, as doesassumingwithoutconditional.Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@mo271 makes sense to me!
assumingtakes declaration names, so the hypothesis lives in the file as a statement with asorryproof and the attribute references it. The idents resolve against the environment (an unknown name errors, hover jumps to the statement), andextract_nameswould emit the fully qualified names. This is useful as well bc if the hypothesis later gains a sorry-free proof, the attribute warns that the formal proof may no longer need to beconditional.