[isabelle] Query towards pseudo constructors
Dear data refinement experts,
I am trying to learn something about code generation. Based on what I
have seen so far, there are two ways to introduce a pseudo constructor
for an abstract type A:
1) define constant f:: C => A and g::A => C, and then prove
lemma [code abstype]: f (g x) = x
,and f becomes a pseudo constructor for the abstract type A
2) define constant f:: C => A, and then declare
Based on my observations, only one of them is used at a time:
"Int.thy": code_datatype "0::int" Pos Neg
"Real.thy": code_datatype Ratreal
"Multiset.thy": code_datatype multiset_of
have adopted the second approach, while
"Rat.thy": lemma [code abstype]:"Frct (quotient_of q) = q"
"Polynomial.thy": lemma Poly_coeffs [simp, code abstype]: "Poly
(coeffs p) = p"
have adopted the first approach.
It seems that the "code_datatype" approach is more flexible than the
"abstype" approach, as multiple constructors can be introduced (I am not
sure if it is not case for the "abstype" approach) and the cardinality
of C can be smaller than that of A (e.g. Ratreal in "Real.thy").
My question is: what is the main difference between these two
approaches? When shall I choose one over the other?
Many thanks in advance,
University of Cambridge
This archive was generated by a fusion of
Pipermail (Mailman edition) and