*To*: Christian Sternagel <c.sternagel at gmail.com>*Subject*: Re: [isabelle] monadic function definition*From*: Gergely Buday <gbuday at gmail.com>*Date*: Mon, 11 Aug 2014 16:31:17 +0200*Cc*: "cl-isabelle-users at lists.cam.ac.uk" <cl-isabelle-users at lists.cam.ac.uk>*In-reply-to*: <53E8D196.6000005@gmail.com>*References*: <CA+3iOznxk7GvnBSwfXEucDnWJ+RB+jzxO8q3d9B4Ejb=54b2WQ@mail.gmail.com> <53E8C9E9.3000709@inf.ethz.ch> <53E8D196.6000005@gmail.com>

Christian Sternagel wrote: > And maybe obvious, but I'll say it anyway: "partial_function" and > do-notation are completely orthogonal. Now it is obvious :-) Where can I find some description of the partial_function definition mechanism? There is a page in the Isar reference manual but that is not very much detailed. - Gergely

**Follow-Ups**:**Re: [isabelle] monadic function definition***From:*Andreas Lochbihler

**References**:**[isabelle] monadic function definition***From:*Gergely Buday

**Re: [isabelle] monadic function definition***From:*Andreas Lochbihler

**Re: [isabelle] monadic function definition***From:*Christian Sternagel

- Previous by Date: Re: [isabelle] monadic function definition
- Next by Date: Re: [isabelle] op =simp=> in congruence rules
- Previous by Thread: Re: [isabelle] monadic function definition
- Next by Thread: Re: [isabelle] monadic function definition
- Cl-isabelle-users August 2014 archives indexes sorted by: [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ date ]
- Cl-isabelle-users list archive Table of Contents
- More information about the Cl-isabelle-users mailing list