-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 455
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: prefer longer parse even if unsuccessful #1658
Merged
Merged
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
2 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains 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
This file contains 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
This file contains 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
Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
---|---|---|
@@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ | ||
syntax "have" ":" term : tactic | ||
example : False := by | ||
have : True := by simp [ -- should *not* parse the shorter `have` syntax and then fail on `:=` |
This file contains 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
Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
---|---|---|
@@ -0,0 +1,4 @@ | ||
longestParsePrio.lean:4:0: error: unexpected end of input; expected ']' | ||
longestParsePrio.lean:2:19-3:26: error: unsolved goals | ||
this : True | ||
⊢ False |
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.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Is this the correct idiom then :) ?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
You can also do
local attribute [instance] lexOrd
before the function, or have a type aliasLex A B
on which to unconditionally put the instance. But this way is fine too, or(inst := lexOrd)
incompare
. If this program were subject to proofs I would generally preferhaveI
here to avoid creating the additional let binding in the generated term, but for this code that's not really a concern and the compiler will normalize the two variants the same anyway.There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I will merge as-is. I think the
haveI
/letI
remark is important, we should discuss it in the next dev-meeting. We also get back to thelet
vslet dep
discussion. It would be great to use the same style forletI
(let inl
?), and have it as part of thelet
family:let
,let rec
,let dep
,let mut
, ...