feat: add pp.mvars and pp.mvars.withType
#3798
Merged
Conversation
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
When making tests, it is inconvenient using `#guard_msgs` when there are metavariables, since the unique numbering is subject to change. Setting `pp.mvars` to false causes metavariables to pretty print as placeholders (`_`). Setting `pp.mvars.withType` to true causes metavariables to pretty print with type ascriptions. Closes leanprover#3781
github-actions
bot
added
the
toolchain-available
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
pp.mvarsto false causes metavariables to pretty print as?_.pp.mvars.withTypeto true causes metavariables to pretty print with type ascriptions.Motivation: when making tests, it is inconvenient using
#guard_msgswhen there are metavariables, since the unique numbering is subject to change.This feature does not use
⋯omissions since a metavariable is already in a sense an omitted term. If repeated metavariables do not appear in an expression, there is a chance that a term pretty printed withpp.mvarsset to false can still elaborate to the correct term, unlike for other omissions.(In the future we could consider an option that pretty prints uniquely numbered metavariables as
?m✝,?m✝¹,?m✝², etc. to be able to tell them apart, at least in the same pretty printed expression. It would take care to make sure that these names are stable across different hovers.)Closes #3781