[Agda] Path to success with Agda?

[Thorsten Altenkirch]

Yes, you have to normalize all previous constraints when you add a new one.

Thorsten
From: Agda <agda-bounces at lists.chalmers.se> on behalf of Andreas Nuyts <andreasnuyts at gmail.com>
Date: Thursday, 1 September 2022 at 12:09
To: Thorsten Altenkirch (staff) <psztxa at exmail.nottingham.ac.uk>, Andrew Pitts <Andrew.Pitts at cl.cam.ac.uk>, agda at lists.chalmers.se <agda at lists.chalmers.se>, Miëtek Bak <mietek at bak.io>
Subject: Re: [Agda] Path to success with Agda?
Hi,

I've been thinking along the lines of this smart case proposal when wondering about the possibility of judgemental naturality (w.r.t. the motive) of eliminators.

I think you have to be more careful when merging constraint sets: what if a new constraint n = b is added to a constraint set containing n' = b' where n' is blocked by the neutral subterm n? This situation doesn't seem to be addressed in the slides as they are.

Best,
Andreas N
On 31.08.22 14:57, Thorsten Altenkirch wrote:
Maybe somebody should implement the smart case…

http://www.cs.nott.ac.uk/~psztxa/talks/shonan11.pdf

From: Agda <agda-bounces at lists.chalmers.se><mailto:agda-bounces at lists.chalmers.se> on behalf of Andrew Pitts <Andrew.Pitts at cl.cam.ac.uk><mailto:Andrew.Pitts at cl.cam.ac.uk>
Date: Tuesday, 30 August 2022 at 10:48
To: agda at lists.chalmers.se<mailto:agda at lists.chalmers.se> <agda at lists.chalmers.se><mailto:agda at lists.chalmers.se>, Miëtek Bak <mietek at bak.io><mailto:mietek at bak.io>
Subject: Re: [Agda] Path to success with Agda?


> On 30 Aug 2022, at 09:29, Miëtek Bak <mietek at bak.io><mailto:mietek at bak.io> wrote:
>
>> On 30 Aug 2022, at 09:58, Andrew Pitts <Andrew.Pitts at cl.cam.ac.uk><mailto:Andrew.Pitts at cl.cam.ac.uk> wrote:
>>
>> So I wanted to mention the humble “case” expression, which functional programmers can more easily relate to, maybe. It’s less powerful that “with”, but sometimes works (wrt the not typechecking thing) when “with” won’t.
>
> It would be interesting to see an example in which `case` works and `with` does not.

I have some and will try to extract them from their context when I get a mo. However, I should qualify what I said:

  "but sometimes [case] works (wrt the not typechecking thing) when “with” won’t”

What I really meant was that, at the time, it was easier for me to use a “case" expression than to figure out how to still use “with” by moving lemmas to the top level, generalizing arguments a bit more, etc, etc. I expect there’s always a way with “with”.

And if you are heavily in to using “rewrite” (“with” disguised), then I guess “case” is not helpful.

Andy

_______________________________________________
Agda mailing list
Agda at lists.chalmers.se<mailto:Agda at lists.chalmers.se>
https://lists.chalmers.se/mailman/listinfo/agda

This message and any attachment are intended solely for the addressee

and may contain confidential information. If you have received this

message in error, please contact the sender and delete the email and

attachment.



Any views or opinions expressed by the author of this email do not

necessarily reflect the views of the University of Nottingham. Email

communications with the University of Nottingham may be monitored

where permitted by law.









_______________________________________________

Agda mailing list

Agda at lists.chalmers.se<mailto:Agda at lists.chalmers.se>

https://lists.chalmers.se/mailman/listinfo/agda




This message and any attachment are intended solely for the addressee
and may contain confidential information. If you have received this
message in error, please contact the sender and delete the email and
attachment. 

Any views or opinions expressed by the author of this email do not
necessarily reflect the views of the University of Nottingham. Email
communications with the University of Nottingham may be monitored 
where permitted by law.




-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.chalmers.se/pipermail/agda/attachments/20220901/d58a4b92/attachment-0001.html>