Re: [isabelle] [Noob] Proof on trees
Also, I had another look at doing it with induct_tac, as such:
lemma "â list .(dfs1 xs)@list = dfs2 xs list"
by (metis Cons_eq_appendI append_assoc)
As induct_tac doesn't have the "arbitrary" parameter, I had to specify
that by putting the universal quantifier on it instead.
I've previously been cautioned against doing this, but it might help
understand the difference.
On28/05/2016 17:19, Rustom Mody wrote:
Thanks Alfio and Daniel
After learning about induction instead of induct_tac some other proofs that
I was stuck with are not going through.
But I really dont know what's happening :-)
Can someone point me to references on the differences??
This archive was generated by a fusion of
Pipermail (Mailman edition) and