You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
I'm a teacher trying to see how far coq is to being usable (and hoping to improve the situation) ; anytime I have a so-called strong induction, I find I always use the same line to get around it, so it's easy to just take it in Ltac and be done:
Ltac strong_nat_induction n := elim: n {-2}n (leqnn n).
makes it possible to do something like:
strong_nat_induction n => [|n IHn].
in proof scripts, and that looks much easier for students.
(NB: I have seen issue coq/coq#5343, but what I'm asking is more in terms of usability than in terms of feature.)
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
I'm a teacher trying to see how far coq is to being usable (and hoping to improve the situation) ; anytime I have a so-called strong induction, I find I always use the same line to get around it, so it's easy to just take it in Ltac and be done:
makes it possible to do something like:
in proof scripts, and that looks much easier for students.
(NB: I have seen issue coq/coq#5343, but what I'm asking is more in terms of usability than in terms of feature.)
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: