Open lsf37 opened 5 months ago
There is also a question about which other monads to support (e.g. error and/or reader monad), but so far most of the instances I've seen are on the plain nondet monad, so I'd vote for starting small and doing that one properly first.
We currently have
_sp
rules for a number of the basic monad constructs, and we're using them manually in some situations, e.g. to avoid case blow-up in wp reasoning or when chaining trivial steps in corres proofs.We should:
_sp
rules -- I think they do have to be manually stated, but their proofs should all follow automatically from the correspondingwp
rulesp
tactic, analogous towp
, but not as sophisticated. For a first version, I would propose a simple Eisbach method that repeatedly applies ansp
set, and potentially automatically does ansp_pre
(analogously towp_pre
)._sp
proofs and replace these to make sure the automation works and is convenient enough to useI don't think we need a full-blown
wp
equivalent forsp
, because we do not want to switch over to generalsp
reasoning or use more of it than necessary (to avoid duplicating rules for kernel functions). This issue only proposes to make those instances where it would be beneficial to use more ergonomic to use and easier to read/review.MCS seems to have a higher use count of
sp
rules, so we should make sure to test the method there.