Re: [isabelle] naming facts

Here is another analogy that I like: try to write proofs as much like Unix pipes
as possible and avoid long-distace cross references.


Am 22/05/2012 11:33, schrieb John Wickerson:
> Dear Isabelle,
> When building an Isabelle script, I often have to come up with names for facts if I am not using them immediately. Coming up with meaningful names all the time is an intellectual burden I could live without when I'm concentrating on a proof. More importantly, even if I did come up with meaningful names all the time, I reckon they would soon get out-of-sync as I modified my script. I briefly tried *numbering* my steps, but again, the numbers quickly get out-of-order as my script evolves, and I have always to bear in mind which number I used last.
> So, my current solution is to have an emacs macro that generates a sequence of 5 random letters when I press "C-c d", which I use to name my facts. I find this works rather well; I've not had a clash yet, and I don't have to engage my brain at all. Here's a little snippet from my current theory, to illustrate:
>> with iecss and "0.prems"(2) have 
>>   dakuy: "set S = set (initials (Graph V \<Lambda> E))" and
>>   iuqxi: "set (initials (Graph V \<Lambda> E)) = set V" by auto
>> from pqshe have wsegy: "set E = {}" by auto  
>> hence hkimj: "E = []" by auto
> How do other users approach this issue?
> John
> ps. One final thought: does there exist a tool that processes an Isabelle script to make it more readable, renaming steps with (say) ascending natural numbers, and removing unused names? I think that would be rather nice.

This archive was generated by a fusion of Pipermail (Mailman edition) and MHonArc.