Skip to content
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

Fix for coq PR #13969 #32

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Jan 4, 2022
Merged

Conversation

mattam82
Copy link
Contributor

@mattam82 mattam82 commented Jan 4, 2022

This allows coq/coq#13969 to go through, by declaring weq as a rewrite relation, that might be inferred by setoid rewrite when it must guess a relation on a type.
Typically happens when one rewrites with eq in a context that only has weq morphisms for the surrounding context.
This should be backwards-compatible.

@damien-pous damien-pous merged commit 4fc9fca into damien-pous:master Jan 4, 2022
@damien-pous
Copy link
Owner

I curious about this mode story for typeclass resolution :)

@mattam82
Copy link
Contributor Author

mattam82 commented Jan 4, 2022

It tames the trigger happiness of resolution :) In setoid_rewrite, where we would sometimes generate Reflexive A ?R constraints for an unknown R, rather than backtracking on all possible reflexive relations we rather use this new RewriteRelation class letting the user list a restricted set of inferrable / preferred rewrite relations to try.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants