Re: [isabelle] naming facts



Thanks Larry. Yes, I am aware of the chaining features (though not all of the features Johannes helpfully pointed out), and do try not to use my "random-name" trick *too* often. Regarding your suggestion of conflating variable-names and fact-names, I'm rather uneasy about this practice: doesn't it make the proof rather confusing if, for instance, "[OF k]" and "[of k]" are actually referring to different k's?

John

On 22 May 2012, at 11:33, Lawrence Paulson wrote:

> I assume that you are aware of the various chaining facilities that exist, including moreover/ultimately. And the ability to refer to facts using backquotes, as in `k>0`.
> 
> With those, I find that I don't need many labels, so that usually the name of the variable involved is sufficient, for example,
> 
> 	assumes k: "k>0"
> 
> 
> Larry Paulson
> 
> 
> On 22 May 2012, at 10:33, John Wickerson wrote:
> 
>> 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.