[opentheory-users] New principle of constant definition

Joe Leslie-Hurd joe at gilith.com
Wed Nov 5 22:49:17 UTC 2014


Hi Rob,

[I'm cc'ing the OpenTheory list because the discussion may be of
general interest.]

I just finished implementing the new principle of constant definition
described in your paper "HOL Constant Definition Done Right":

http://www.lemma-one.com/papers/hcddr.pdf

It all makes perfect sense to me and the instructions were
straightforward to follow, but I was wondering if you could explain
the rationale behind this constraint:

"the free variables of p must be contained in the v_i"

It seems sound to permit extra free variables, for example in the
following definition

v = 0 |- n + v = n

Also, why "contained in" and not "exactly"? If there are extra
variables v_i that are not free in p, then it is a simple matter to
remove them from the hypotheses before calling gen_new_specification.

Finally, a practical point that I ran into during implementation: in
the case where the set v_i is empty (i.e., there is nothing to
define), should the input theorem simply be returned or do you
consider that an error condition?

Cheers,

Joe



More information about the opentheory-users mailing list