Skip to content

Adjustments to new LFSC grammar. #53

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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Open
alex-ozdemir wants to merge 3 commits into
base: Version_1.5
Choose a base branch
from
Open

Adjustments to new LFSC grammar. #53

Changes from 2 commits
Commits
Show all changes
3 commits
Select commit Hold shift + click to select a range
957f4b2
modify LFSC 1.5 grammar to what rlfsc's "sugar" branch currently impl…
alex-ozdemir Dec 8, 2020
a834b33
Update 'assuming' form
alex-ozdemir Dec 9, 2020
eeae386
Post-discussion changes:
alex-ozdemir Dec 14, 2020
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
10 changes: 5 additions & 5 deletions doc/lfsc1_5.g4
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -78,7 +78,7 @@ ntype
// (^ c t)

// Extension /////////////////////
vtype : '(' 'var' iden ntype ')' ;
vtype : '(' 'id' iden ntype ')' ;
Comment thread
alex-ozdemir marked this conversation as resolved.
Outdated
//////////////////////////////////

type
Expand All @@ -89,7 +89,7 @@ type
| '(' '!' iden ntype type ')'
// Extension ///////////////////////////////
| '(' 'Forall' iden ntype type ')'
| '(' '->' ( ntype | vtype )+ type ')'
| '(' '->' '(' ( ntype | vtype )+ ')' type ')'

@alex-ozdemir alex-ozdemir Dec 9, 2020 •
edited
Loading

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Surrounding the argument list in parentheses makes it clear when we are done with arguments.
This makes it easier to type-check the return type without constructing an AST for it. Without the parentheses it would be hard to avoid constructing the AST for the return type, since we wouldn't know it isn't an argument (which we would need an AST for!) until we're done processing it.

@alex-ozdemir alex-ozdemir Dec 9, 2020

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Also, this makes -> more like declare-rule and declare-type.

////////////////////////////////////////////
;
// (Forall ξ τ₁ τ₂)
Expand Down Expand Up @@ -117,14 +117,14 @@ term
| rat_const
| '(' term term+ ')'
| '(' '\\' iden term ')'
| '(' '@' iden term ')'
| '(' '@' iden term term ')'

@alex-ozdemir alex-ozdemir Dec 9, 2020

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I think was just a typo.

| '(' ':' type term ')'
| '(' '%' iden type term ')'
// Extensions ///////////////////
| '(' 'lam' iden term ')'
| '(' 'let' iden term term ')'
| '(' 'proved-by' type term ')'
| '(' 'assuming' vtype+ term ')'
| '(' 'assuming' '(' (ntype | vtype)+ ')' term ')'

@alex-ozdemir alex-ozdemir Dec 9, 2020

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Adding parentheses is a good idea here, just like for the -> form.
It's even more important in this case, because most of the proof will likely be in the final term here, so we really don't want to construct the AST for it.

;
//////////////////////////////////
// (lam ξ t)
Expand Down Expand Up @@ -167,4 +167,4 @@ code
INT : [0-9]+ ;
RAT : ('0' | [1-9][0-9]*) '/' [1-9][0-9]* ;
ID : [a-zA-Z~!@$%^&*_\-+=<>.?/][a-zA-Z0-9~!@$%^&*_\-+=<>.?/]* ;
KW : ':'[a-zA-Z0-9~!@$%^&*_\-+=<>.?/]* ;
KW : ':'[a-zA-Z0-9~!@$%^&*_\-+=<>.?/]* ;