The first two levels can be completed using just a single refl without actually proving anything. I found this by accident when I did the following in the second level:
induction m,
rwa[pow_succ, pow_zero, mul_zero],
expecting only the base case to be proved, but finding out the game thinks the entire proof is already completed. It seems the refl tactic proves some goals of the form A = B in those two levels, even if A and B aren't the same thing.
The first two levels can be completed using just a single
refl
without actually proving anything. I found this by accident when I did the following in the second level:expecting only the base case to be proved, but finding out the game thinks the entire proof is already completed. It seems the
refl
tactic proves some goals of the formA = B
in those two levels, even ifA
andB
aren't the same thing.