X-Git-Url: http://matita.cs.unibo.it/gitweb/?a=blobdiff_plain;f=matita%2Fhelp%2FC%2Fsec_tactics.xml;h=aa9610df0aa83e22c517da9782111274710a0d56;hb=1f32c644494bdd49b455501f3f797f781a1bd24a;hp=cd26700ab703a885027108ae4bd5fa217dea8830;hpb=45d71beffd253ffd767a9afbfcec5c4f44afd8a8;p=helm.git diff --git a/matita/help/C/sec_tactics.xml b/matita/help/C/sec_tactics.xml index cd26700ab..aa9610df0 100644 --- a/matita/help/C/sec_tactics.xml +++ b/matita/help/C/sec_tactics.xml @@ -89,13 +89,13 @@ applyS applyS - applyS t + applyS t auto_params Synopsis: - applyS &sterm; + applyS &sterm; &autoparams; @@ -123,6 +123,8 @@ Then it closes the current sequent by applying t to n implicit arguments (that become new sequents). + The auto_params parameters are passed + directly to auto paramodulation. @@ -176,13 +178,13 @@ auto auto - auto depth=d width=w paramodulation full + auto params Synopsis: - auto [depth=&nat;] [width=&nat;] [paramodulation] [full] + auto &autoparams; @@ -190,10 +192,10 @@ None, but the tactic may fail finding a proof if every proof is in the search space that is pruned away. Pruning is - controlled by d and w. + controlled by the optional params. Moreover, only lemmas whose type signature is a subset of the signature of the current sequent are considered. The signature of - a sequent is ...TODO + a sequent is ...&TODO; @@ -213,6 +215,52 @@ + + cases + cases + + cases t hyps + + + + + Synopsis: + + + cases + &term; [([&id;]…)] + + + + + Pre-conditions: + + + t must inhabit an inductive type + + + + + Action: + + + It proceed by cases on t. The new generated + hypothesis in each branch are named according to + hyps. + + + + + New sequents to prove: + + One new sequent for each constructor of the type of + t. Each sequent has a new hypothesis for + each argument of the constructor. + + + + + clear clear @@ -536,30 +584,35 @@ - - discriminate - discriminate - discriminate p + + destruct + destruct + destruct p Synopsis: - discriminate &sterm; + destruct &sterm; Pre-conditions: - p must have type K t1 ... tn = K' t'1 ... t'm where K and K' must be different constructors of the same inductive type and each argument list can be empty if -its constructor takes no arguments. + p must have type E1 = E2 where the two sides of the equality are possibly applied constructors of an inductive type. Action: - It closes the current sequent by proving the absurdity of - p. + The tactic recursively compare the two sides of the equality + looking for different constructors in corresponding position. + If two of them are found, the tactic closes the current sequent + by proving the absurdity of p. Otherwise + it adds a new hypothesis for each leaf of the formula that + states the equality of the subformulae in the corresponding + positions on the two sides of the equality. + @@ -950,43 +1003,6 @@ its constructor takes no arguments. - - injection - injection - injection p - - - - Synopsis: - - injection &sterm; - - - - Pre-conditions: - - p must have type K t1 ... tn = K t'1 ... t'n where both argument lists are empty if -K takes no arguments. - - - - Action: - - It derives new hypotheses by injectivity of - K. - - - - New sequents to prove: - - The new sequent to prove is equal to the current sequent - with the additional hypotheses - t1=t'1 ... tn=t'n. - - - - - intro intro