Open
Conversation
Contributor
|
A comment on the soundness appendix -- is there any plan of adding a definition for the validity of the typing context C itself (which probably just says that all types in C.Types are valid)? Unlike pre-3.0, the type system is quite rich currently, and C.Types can contain ill-formed types in itself (e.g. invalid deftypes/heaptypes etc). The validity of C is required to prove that intermediate matchings for deftypes/heaptypes are correct. |
Member
Author
|
@raoxiaojia, good point. Yes, at this point we need that, too. I'll look into it. |
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Formulate extra rules from Type Soundness Appendix in SpecTec.
Fix SpecTec sideconditions pass to not generate vacuous iterated premises.
@f52985, the prose backend crashes failing to find one of the added relations. That may have to do with the preceding "Yet" warning from
translate_rulepr, which IIUC means that something is unimplemented in the backend. Can you please have a look?