nipkow@10654
|
1 |
%
|
nipkow@10654
|
2 |
\begin{isabellebody}%
|
nipkow@10654
|
3 |
\def\isabellecontext{Partial}%
|
nipkow@10654
|
4 |
%
|
nipkow@10654
|
5 |
\begin{isamarkuptext}%
|
nipkow@10654
|
6 |
\noindent
|
nipkow@10654
|
7 |
Throughout the tutorial we have emphasized the fact that all functions
|
nipkow@10654
|
8 |
in HOL are total. Hence we cannot hope to define truly partial
|
nipkow@10654
|
9 |
functions. The best we can do are functions that are
|
nipkow@10654
|
10 |
\emph{underdefined}\index{underdefined function}:
|
nipkow@10654
|
11 |
for certain arguments we only know that a result
|
nipkow@10654
|
12 |
exists, but we don't know what it is. When defining functions that are
|
nipkow@10654
|
13 |
normally considered partial, underdefinedness turns out to be a very
|
nipkow@10654
|
14 |
reasonable alternative.
|
nipkow@10654
|
15 |
|
nipkow@10654
|
16 |
We have already seen an instance of underdefinedness by means of
|
nipkow@10654
|
17 |
non-exhaustive pattern matching: the definition of \isa{last} in
|
nipkow@10654
|
18 |
\S\ref{sec:recdef-examples}. The same is allowed for \isacommand{primrec}%
|
nipkow@10654
|
19 |
\end{isamarkuptext}%
|
nipkow@10654
|
20 |
\isacommand{consts}\ hd\ {\isacharcolon}{\isacharcolon}\ {\isachardoublequote}{\isacharprime}a\ list\ {\isasymRightarrow}\ {\isacharprime}a{\isachardoublequote}\isanewline
|
nipkow@10654
|
21 |
\isacommand{primrec}\ {\isachardoublequote}hd\ {\isacharparenleft}x{\isacharhash}xs{\isacharparenright}\ {\isacharequal}\ x{\isachardoublequote}%
|
nipkow@10654
|
22 |
\begin{isamarkuptext}%
|
nipkow@10654
|
23 |
\noindent
|
nipkow@10654
|
24 |
although it generates a warning.
|
nipkow@10654
|
25 |
|
nipkow@10654
|
26 |
Even ordinary definitions allow underdefinedness, this time by means of
|
nipkow@10654
|
27 |
preconditions:%
|
nipkow@10654
|
28 |
\end{isamarkuptext}%
|
nipkow@10654
|
29 |
\isacommand{constdefs}\ minus\ {\isacharcolon}{\isacharcolon}\ {\isachardoublequote}nat\ {\isasymRightarrow}\ nat\ {\isasymRightarrow}\ nat{\isachardoublequote}\isanewline
|
nipkow@10654
|
30 |
{\isachardoublequote}n\ {\isasymle}\ m\ {\isasymLongrightarrow}\ minus\ m\ n\ {\isasymequiv}\ m\ {\isacharminus}\ n{\isachardoublequote}%
|
nipkow@10654
|
31 |
\begin{isamarkuptext}%
|
nipkow@10654
|
32 |
The rest of this section is devoted to the question of how to define
|
nipkow@10654
|
33 |
partial recursive functions by other means that non-exhaustive pattern
|
nipkow@10654
|
34 |
matching.%
|
nipkow@10654
|
35 |
\end{isamarkuptext}%
|
nipkow@10654
|
36 |
%
|
paulson@10878
|
37 |
\isamarkupsubsubsection{Guarded Recursion%
|
nipkow@10654
|
38 |
}
|
nipkow@10654
|
39 |
%
|
nipkow@10654
|
40 |
\begin{isamarkuptext}%
|
nipkow@10654
|
41 |
Neither \isacommand{primrec} nor \isacommand{recdef} allow to
|
nipkow@10654
|
42 |
prefix an equation with a condition in the way ordinary definitions do
|
nipkow@10654
|
43 |
(see \isa{minus} above). Instead we have to move the condition over
|
nipkow@10654
|
44 |
to the right-hand side of the equation. Given a partial function $f$
|
nipkow@10654
|
45 |
that should satisfy the recursion equation $f(x) = t$ over its domain
|
nipkow@10654
|
46 |
$dom(f)$, we turn this into the \isacommand{recdef}
|
nipkow@10654
|
47 |
\begin{isabelle}%
|
nipkow@10654
|
48 |
\ \ \ \ \ f\ x\ {\isacharequal}\ {\isacharparenleft}if\ x\ {\isasymin}\ dom\ f\ then\ t\ else\ arbitrary{\isacharparenright}%
|
nipkow@10654
|
49 |
\end{isabelle}
|
nipkow@10654
|
50 |
where \isa{arbitrary} is a predeclared constant of type \isa{{\isacharprime}a}
|
nipkow@10654
|
51 |
which has no definition. Thus we know nothing about its value,
|
nipkow@10654
|
52 |
which is ideal for specifying underdefined functions on top of it.
|
nipkow@10654
|
53 |
|
nipkow@10654
|
54 |
As a simple example we define division on \isa{nat}:%
|
nipkow@10654
|
55 |
\end{isamarkuptext}%
|
nipkow@10654
|
56 |
\isacommand{consts}\ divi\ {\isacharcolon}{\isacharcolon}\ {\isachardoublequote}nat\ {\isasymtimes}\ nat\ {\isasymRightarrow}\ nat{\isachardoublequote}\isanewline
|
nipkow@10654
|
57 |
\isacommand{recdef}\ divi\ {\isachardoublequote}measure{\isacharparenleft}{\isasymlambda}{\isacharparenleft}m{\isacharcomma}n{\isacharparenright}{\isachardot}\ m{\isacharparenright}{\isachardoublequote}\isanewline
|
nipkow@10654
|
58 |
\ \ {\isachardoublequote}divi{\isacharparenleft}m{\isacharcomma}n{\isacharparenright}\ {\isacharequal}\ {\isacharparenleft}if\ n\ {\isacharequal}\ {\isadigit{0}}\ then\ arbitrary\ else\isanewline
|
nipkow@10654
|
59 |
\ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ if\ m\ {\isacharless}\ n\ then\ {\isadigit{0}}\ else\ divi{\isacharparenleft}m{\isacharminus}n{\isacharcomma}n{\isacharparenright}{\isacharplus}{\isadigit{1}}{\isacharparenright}{\isachardoublequote}%
|
nipkow@10654
|
60 |
\begin{isamarkuptext}%
|
nipkow@10654
|
61 |
\noindent Of course we could also have defined
|
nipkow@10654
|
62 |
\isa{divi\ {\isacharparenleft}m{\isacharcomma}\ {\isadigit{0}}{\isacharparenright}} to be some specific number, for example 0. The
|
nipkow@10654
|
63 |
latter option is chosen for the predefined \isa{div} function, which
|
paulson@10878
|
64 |
simplifies proofs at the expense of deviating from the
|
paulson@10878
|
65 |
standard mathematical division function.
|
nipkow@10654
|
66 |
|
nipkow@10654
|
67 |
As a more substantial example we consider the problem of searching a graph.
|
nipkow@10654
|
68 |
For simplicity our graph is given by a function (\isa{f}) of
|
nipkow@10654
|
69 |
type \isa{{\isacharprime}a\ {\isasymRightarrow}\ {\isacharprime}a} which
|
nipkow@10654
|
70 |
maps each node to its successor, and the task is to find the end of a chain,
|
nipkow@10654
|
71 |
i.e.\ a node pointing to itself. Here is a first attempt:
|
nipkow@10654
|
72 |
\begin{isabelle}%
|
nipkow@10654
|
73 |
\ \ \ \ \ find\ {\isacharparenleft}f{\isacharcomma}\ x{\isacharparenright}\ {\isacharequal}\ {\isacharparenleft}if\ f\ x\ {\isacharequal}\ x\ then\ x\ else\ find\ {\isacharparenleft}f{\isacharcomma}\ f\ x{\isacharparenright}{\isacharparenright}%
|
nipkow@10654
|
74 |
\end{isabelle}
|
nipkow@10654
|
75 |
This may be viewed as a fixed point finder or as one half of the well known
|
nipkow@10654
|
76 |
\emph{Union-Find} algorithm.
|
nipkow@10654
|
77 |
The snag is that it may not terminate if \isa{f} has nontrivial cycles.
|
nipkow@10654
|
78 |
Phrased differently, the relation%
|
nipkow@10654
|
79 |
\end{isamarkuptext}%
|
nipkow@10654
|
80 |
\isacommand{constdefs}\ step{\isadigit{1}}\ {\isacharcolon}{\isacharcolon}\ {\isachardoublequote}{\isacharparenleft}{\isacharprime}a\ {\isasymRightarrow}\ {\isacharprime}a{\isacharparenright}\ {\isasymRightarrow}\ {\isacharparenleft}{\isacharprime}a\ {\isasymtimes}\ {\isacharprime}a{\isacharparenright}set{\isachardoublequote}\isanewline
|
nipkow@10654
|
81 |
\ \ {\isachardoublequote}step{\isadigit{1}}\ f\ {\isasymequiv}\ {\isacharbraceleft}{\isacharparenleft}y{\isacharcomma}x{\isacharparenright}{\isachardot}\ y\ {\isacharequal}\ f\ x\ {\isasymand}\ y\ {\isasymnoteq}\ x{\isacharbraceright}{\isachardoublequote}%
|
nipkow@10654
|
82 |
\begin{isamarkuptext}%
|
nipkow@10654
|
83 |
\noindent
|
nipkow@10654
|
84 |
must be well-founded. Thus we make the following definition:%
|
nipkow@10654
|
85 |
\end{isamarkuptext}%
|
nipkow@10654
|
86 |
\isacommand{consts}\ find\ {\isacharcolon}{\isacharcolon}\ {\isachardoublequote}{\isacharparenleft}{\isacharprime}a\ {\isasymRightarrow}\ {\isacharprime}a{\isacharparenright}\ {\isasymtimes}\ {\isacharprime}a\ {\isasymRightarrow}\ {\isacharprime}a{\isachardoublequote}\isanewline
|
nipkow@10654
|
87 |
\isacommand{recdef}\ find\ {\isachardoublequote}same{\isacharunderscore}fst\ {\isacharparenleft}{\isasymlambda}f{\isachardot}\ wf{\isacharparenleft}step{\isadigit{1}}\ f{\isacharparenright}{\isacharparenright}\ step{\isadigit{1}}{\isachardoublequote}\isanewline
|
nipkow@10654
|
88 |
\ \ {\isachardoublequote}find{\isacharparenleft}f{\isacharcomma}x{\isacharparenright}\ {\isacharequal}\ {\isacharparenleft}if\ wf{\isacharparenleft}step{\isadigit{1}}\ f{\isacharparenright}\isanewline
|
nipkow@10654
|
89 |
\ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ then\ if\ f\ x\ {\isacharequal}\ x\ then\ x\ else\ find{\isacharparenleft}f{\isacharcomma}\ f\ x{\isacharparenright}\isanewline
|
nipkow@10654
|
90 |
\ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ else\ arbitrary{\isacharparenright}{\isachardoublequote}\isanewline
|
nipkow@10654
|
91 |
{\isacharparenleft}\isakeyword{hints}\ recdef{\isacharunderscore}simp{\isacharcolon}same{\isacharunderscore}fst{\isacharunderscore}def\ step{\isadigit{1}}{\isacharunderscore}def{\isacharparenright}%
|
nipkow@10654
|
92 |
\begin{isamarkuptext}%
|
nipkow@10654
|
93 |
\noindent
|
nipkow@10654
|
94 |
The recursion equation itself should be clear enough: it is our aborted
|
nipkow@10654
|
95 |
first attempt augmented with a check that there are no non-trivial loops.
|
nipkow@10654
|
96 |
|
nipkow@10654
|
97 |
What complicates the termination proof is that the argument of
|
nipkow@10654
|
98 |
\isa{find} is a pair. To express the required well-founded relation
|
nipkow@10654
|
99 |
we employ the predefined combinator \isa{same{\isacharunderscore}fst} of type
|
nipkow@10654
|
100 |
\begin{isabelle}%
|
nipkow@10654
|
101 |
\ \ \ \ \ {\isacharparenleft}{\isacharprime}a\ {\isasymRightarrow}\ bool{\isacharparenright}\ {\isasymRightarrow}\ {\isacharparenleft}{\isacharprime}a\ {\isasymRightarrow}\ {\isacharparenleft}{\isacharprime}b{\isasymtimes}{\isacharprime}b{\isacharparenright}set{\isacharparenright}\ {\isasymRightarrow}\ {\isacharparenleft}{\isacharparenleft}{\isacharprime}a{\isasymtimes}{\isacharprime}b{\isacharparenright}\ {\isasymtimes}\ {\isacharparenleft}{\isacharprime}a{\isasymtimes}{\isacharprime}b{\isacharparenright}{\isacharparenright}set%
|
nipkow@10654
|
102 |
\end{isabelle}
|
nipkow@10654
|
103 |
defined as
|
nipkow@10654
|
104 |
\begin{isabelle}%
|
nipkow@10654
|
105 |
\ \ \ \ \ same{\isacharunderscore}fst\ P\ R\ {\isasymequiv}\ {\isacharbraceleft}{\isacharparenleft}{\isacharparenleft}x{\isacharprime}{\isacharcomma}\ y{\isacharprime}{\isacharparenright}{\isacharcomma}\ x{\isacharcomma}\ y{\isacharparenright}{\isachardot}\ x{\isacharprime}\ {\isacharequal}\ x\ {\isasymand}\ P\ x\ {\isasymand}\ {\isacharparenleft}y{\isacharprime}{\isacharcomma}\ y{\isacharparenright}\ {\isasymin}\ R\ x{\isacharbraceright}%
|
nipkow@10654
|
106 |
\end{isabelle}
|
nipkow@10654
|
107 |
This combinator is designed for recursive functions on pairs where the first
|
nipkow@10654
|
108 |
component of the argument is passed unchanged to all recursive
|
nipkow@10654
|
109 |
calls. Given a constraint on the first component and a relation on the second
|
nipkow@10654
|
110 |
component, \isa{same{\isacharunderscore}fst} builds the required relation on pairs.
|
nipkow@10654
|
111 |
The theorem \begin{isabelle}%
|
nipkow@10654
|
112 |
\ \ \ \ \ {\isacharparenleft}{\isasymAnd}x{\isachardot}\ P\ x\ {\isasymLongrightarrow}\ wf\ {\isacharparenleft}R\ x{\isacharparenright}{\isacharparenright}\ {\isasymLongrightarrow}\ wf\ {\isacharparenleft}same{\isacharunderscore}fst\ P\ R{\isacharparenright}%
|
nipkow@10654
|
113 |
\end{isabelle}
|
nipkow@10654
|
114 |
is known to the well-foundedness prover of \isacommand{recdef}.
|
nipkow@10654
|
115 |
Thus well-foundedness of the given relation is immediate.
|
nipkow@10654
|
116 |
Furthermore, each recursive call descends along the given relation:
|
nipkow@10654
|
117 |
the first argument stays unchanged and the second one descends along
|
nipkow@10654
|
118 |
\isa{step{\isadigit{1}}\ f}. The proof merely requires unfolding of some definitions.
|
nipkow@10654
|
119 |
|
nipkow@10654
|
120 |
Normally you will then derive the following conditional variant of and from
|
nipkow@10654
|
121 |
the recursion equation%
|
nipkow@10654
|
122 |
\end{isamarkuptext}%
|
nipkow@10654
|
123 |
\isacommand{lemma}\ {\isacharbrackleft}simp{\isacharbrackright}{\isacharcolon}\isanewline
|
nipkow@10654
|
124 |
\ \ {\isachardoublequote}wf{\isacharparenleft}step{\isadigit{1}}\ f{\isacharparenright}\ {\isasymLongrightarrow}\ find{\isacharparenleft}f{\isacharcomma}x{\isacharparenright}\ {\isacharequal}\ {\isacharparenleft}if\ f\ x\ {\isacharequal}\ x\ then\ x\ else\ find{\isacharparenleft}f{\isacharcomma}\ f\ x{\isacharparenright}{\isacharparenright}{\isachardoublequote}\isanewline
|
nipkow@10654
|
125 |
\isacommand{by}\ simp%
|
nipkow@10654
|
126 |
\begin{isamarkuptext}%
|
nipkow@10654
|
127 |
\noindent and then disable the original recursion equation:%
|
nipkow@10654
|
128 |
\end{isamarkuptext}%
|
nipkow@10654
|
129 |
\isacommand{declare}\ find{\isachardot}simps{\isacharbrackleft}simp\ del{\isacharbrackright}%
|
nipkow@10654
|
130 |
\begin{isamarkuptext}%
|
nipkow@10654
|
131 |
We can reason about such underdefined functions just like about any other
|
nipkow@10654
|
132 |
recursive function. Here is a simple example of recursion induction:%
|
nipkow@10654
|
133 |
\end{isamarkuptext}%
|
nipkow@10654
|
134 |
\isacommand{lemma}\ {\isachardoublequote}wf{\isacharparenleft}step{\isadigit{1}}\ f{\isacharparenright}\ {\isasymlongrightarrow}\ f{\isacharparenleft}find{\isacharparenleft}f{\isacharcomma}x{\isacharparenright}{\isacharparenright}\ {\isacharequal}\ find{\isacharparenleft}f{\isacharcomma}x{\isacharparenright}{\isachardoublequote}\isanewline
|
nipkow@10654
|
135 |
\isacommand{apply}{\isacharparenleft}induct{\isacharunderscore}tac\ f\ x\ rule{\isacharcolon}find{\isachardot}induct{\isacharparenright}\isanewline
|
nipkow@10654
|
136 |
\isacommand{apply}\ simp\isanewline
|
nipkow@10654
|
137 |
\isacommand{done}%
|
paulson@10878
|
138 |
\isamarkupsubsubsection{The {\tt\slshape while} Combinator%
|
nipkow@10654
|
139 |
}
|
nipkow@10654
|
140 |
%
|
nipkow@10654
|
141 |
\begin{isamarkuptext}%
|
nipkow@10654
|
142 |
If the recursive function happens to be tail recursive, its
|
nipkow@10654
|
143 |
definition becomes a triviality if based on the predefined \isaindexbold{while}
|
paulson@10878
|
144 |
combinator. The latter lives in the Library theory
|
nipkow@10654
|
145 |
\isa{While_Combinator}, which is not part of \isa{Main} but needs to
|
nipkow@10654
|
146 |
be included explicitly among the ancestor theories.
|
nipkow@10654
|
147 |
|
nipkow@10654
|
148 |
Constant \isa{while} is of type \isa{{\isacharparenleft}{\isacharprime}a\ {\isasymRightarrow}\ bool{\isacharparenright}\ {\isasymRightarrow}\ {\isacharparenleft}{\isacharprime}a\ {\isasymRightarrow}\ {\isacharprime}a{\isacharparenright}\ {\isasymRightarrow}\ {\isacharprime}a}
|
nipkow@10654
|
149 |
and satisfies the recursion equation \begin{isabelle}%
|
nipkow@10654
|
150 |
\ \ \ \ \ while\ b\ c\ s\ {\isacharequal}\ {\isacharparenleft}if\ b\ s\ then\ while\ b\ c\ {\isacharparenleft}c\ s{\isacharparenright}\ else\ s{\isacharparenright}%
|
nipkow@10654
|
151 |
\end{isabelle}
|
nipkow@10654
|
152 |
That is, \isa{while\ b\ c\ s} is equivalent to the imperative program
|
nipkow@10654
|
153 |
\begin{verbatim}
|
nipkow@10654
|
154 |
x := s; while b(x) do x := c(x); return x
|
nipkow@10654
|
155 |
\end{verbatim}
|
nipkow@10654
|
156 |
In general, \isa{s} will be a tuple (better still: a record). As an example
|
nipkow@10654
|
157 |
consider the tail recursive variant of function \isa{find} above:%
|
nipkow@10654
|
158 |
\end{isamarkuptext}%
|
nipkow@10654
|
159 |
\isacommand{constdefs}\ find{\isadigit{2}}\ {\isacharcolon}{\isacharcolon}\ {\isachardoublequote}{\isacharparenleft}{\isacharprime}a\ {\isasymRightarrow}\ {\isacharprime}a{\isacharparenright}\ {\isasymRightarrow}\ {\isacharprime}a\ {\isasymRightarrow}\ {\isacharprime}a{\isachardoublequote}\isanewline
|
nipkow@10654
|
160 |
\ \ {\isachardoublequote}find{\isadigit{2}}\ f\ x\ {\isasymequiv}\isanewline
|
nipkow@10654
|
161 |
\ \ \ fst{\isacharparenleft}while\ {\isacharparenleft}{\isasymlambda}{\isacharparenleft}x{\isacharcomma}x{\isacharprime}{\isacharparenright}{\isachardot}\ x{\isacharprime}\ {\isasymnoteq}\ x{\isacharparenright}\ {\isacharparenleft}{\isasymlambda}{\isacharparenleft}x{\isacharcomma}x{\isacharprime}{\isacharparenright}{\isachardot}\ {\isacharparenleft}x{\isacharprime}{\isacharcomma}f\ x{\isacharprime}{\isacharparenright}{\isacharparenright}\ {\isacharparenleft}x{\isacharcomma}f\ x{\isacharparenright}{\isacharparenright}{\isachardoublequote}%
|
nipkow@10654
|
162 |
\begin{isamarkuptext}%
|
nipkow@10654
|
163 |
\noindent
|
nipkow@10654
|
164 |
The loop operates on two ``local variables'' \isa{x} and \isa{x{\isacharprime}}
|
nipkow@10654
|
165 |
containing the ``current'' and the ``next'' value of function \isa{f}.
|
nipkow@10654
|
166 |
They are initalized with the global \isa{x} and \isa{f\ x}. At the
|
nipkow@10654
|
167 |
end \isa{fst} selects the local \isa{x}.
|
nipkow@10654
|
168 |
|
nipkow@10654
|
169 |
This looks like we can define at least tail recursive functions
|
nipkow@10654
|
170 |
without bothering about termination after all. But there is no free
|
nipkow@10654
|
171 |
lunch: when proving properties of functions defined by \isa{while},
|
nipkow@10654
|
172 |
termination rears its ugly head again. Here is
|
nipkow@10654
|
173 |
\isa{while{\isacharunderscore}rule}, the well known proof rule for total
|
nipkow@10654
|
174 |
correctness of loops expressed with \isa{while}:
|
nipkow@10654
|
175 |
\begin{isabelle}%
|
nipkow@10696
|
176 |
\ \ \ \ \ {\isasymlbrakk}P\ s{\isacharsemicolon}\ {\isasymAnd}s{\isachardot}\ {\isasymlbrakk}P\ s{\isacharsemicolon}\ b\ s{\isasymrbrakk}\ {\isasymLongrightarrow}\ P\ {\isacharparenleft}c\ s{\isacharparenright}{\isacharsemicolon}\isanewline
|
wenzelm@10950
|
177 |
\isaindent{\ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ }{\isasymAnd}s{\isachardot}\ {\isasymlbrakk}P\ s{\isacharsemicolon}\ {\isasymnot}\ b\ s{\isasymrbrakk}\ {\isasymLongrightarrow}\ Q\ s{\isacharsemicolon}\ wf\ r{\isacharsemicolon}\isanewline
|
wenzelm@10950
|
178 |
\isaindent{\ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ }{\isasymAnd}s{\isachardot}\ {\isasymlbrakk}P\ s{\isacharsemicolon}\ b\ s{\isasymrbrakk}\ {\isasymLongrightarrow}\ {\isacharparenleft}c\ s{\isacharcomma}\ s{\isacharparenright}\ {\isasymin}\ r{\isasymrbrakk}\isanewline
|
wenzelm@10950
|
179 |
\isaindent{\ \ \ \ \ }{\isasymLongrightarrow}\ Q\ {\isacharparenleft}while\ b\ c\ s{\isacharparenright}%
|
nipkow@10654
|
180 |
\end{isabelle} \isa{P} needs to be
|
nipkow@10654
|
181 |
true of the initial state \isa{s} and invariant under \isa{c}
|
paulson@10878
|
182 |
(premises 1 and~2). The post-condition \isa{Q} must become true when
|
paulson@10878
|
183 |
leaving the loop (premise~3). And each loop iteration must descend
|
paulson@10878
|
184 |
along a well-founded relation \isa{r} (premises 4 and~5).
|
nipkow@10654
|
185 |
|
nipkow@10654
|
186 |
Let us now prove that \isa{find{\isadigit{2}}} does indeed find a fixed point. Instead
|
nipkow@10654
|
187 |
of induction we apply the above while rule, suitably instantiated.
|
nipkow@10654
|
188 |
Only the final premise of \isa{while{\isacharunderscore}rule} is left unproved
|
nipkow@10654
|
189 |
by \isa{auto} but falls to \isa{simp}:%
|
nipkow@10654
|
190 |
\end{isamarkuptext}%
|
paulson@10878
|
191 |
\isacommand{lemma}\ lem{\isacharcolon}\ {\isachardoublequote}{\isasymlbrakk}\ wf{\isacharparenleft}step{\isadigit{1}}\ f{\isacharparenright}{\isacharsemicolon}\ x{\isacharprime}\ {\isacharequal}\ f\ x\ {\isasymrbrakk}\ {\isasymLongrightarrow}\ \isanewline
|
paulson@10878
|
192 |
\ \ \ {\isasymexists}y{\isachardot}\ while\ {\isacharparenleft}{\isasymlambda}{\isacharparenleft}x{\isacharcomma}x{\isacharprime}{\isacharparenright}{\isachardot}\ x{\isacharprime}\ {\isasymnoteq}\ x{\isacharparenright}\ {\isacharparenleft}{\isasymlambda}{\isacharparenleft}x{\isacharcomma}x{\isacharprime}{\isacharparenright}{\isachardot}\ {\isacharparenleft}x{\isacharprime}{\isacharcomma}f\ x{\isacharprime}{\isacharparenright}{\isacharparenright}\ {\isacharparenleft}x{\isacharcomma}x{\isacharprime}{\isacharparenright}\ {\isacharequal}\ {\isacharparenleft}y{\isacharcomma}y{\isacharparenright}\ {\isasymand}\isanewline
|
paulson@10878
|
193 |
\ \ \ \ \ \ \ f\ y\ {\isacharequal}\ y{\isachardoublequote}\isanewline
|
nipkow@10654
|
194 |
\isacommand{apply}{\isacharparenleft}rule{\isacharunderscore}tac\ P\ {\isacharequal}\ {\isachardoublequote}{\isasymlambda}{\isacharparenleft}x{\isacharcomma}x{\isacharprime}{\isacharparenright}{\isachardot}\ x{\isacharprime}\ {\isacharequal}\ f\ x{\isachardoublequote}\ \isakeyword{and}\isanewline
|
nipkow@10654
|
195 |
\ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ r\ {\isacharequal}\ {\isachardoublequote}inv{\isacharunderscore}image\ {\isacharparenleft}step{\isadigit{1}}\ f{\isacharparenright}\ fst{\isachardoublequote}\ \isakeyword{in}\ while{\isacharunderscore}rule{\isacharparenright}\isanewline
|
nipkow@10654
|
196 |
\isacommand{apply}\ auto\isanewline
|
nipkow@10654
|
197 |
\isacommand{apply}{\isacharparenleft}simp\ add{\isacharcolon}inv{\isacharunderscore}image{\isacharunderscore}def\ step{\isadigit{1}}{\isacharunderscore}def{\isacharparenright}\isanewline
|
nipkow@10654
|
198 |
\isacommand{done}%
|
nipkow@10654
|
199 |
\begin{isamarkuptext}%
|
nipkow@10654
|
200 |
The theorem itself is a simple consequence of this lemma:%
|
nipkow@10654
|
201 |
\end{isamarkuptext}%
|
nipkow@10654
|
202 |
\isacommand{theorem}\ {\isachardoublequote}wf{\isacharparenleft}step{\isadigit{1}}\ f{\isacharparenright}\ {\isasymLongrightarrow}\ f{\isacharparenleft}find{\isadigit{2}}\ f\ x{\isacharparenright}\ {\isacharequal}\ find{\isadigit{2}}\ f\ x{\isachardoublequote}\isanewline
|
nipkow@10654
|
203 |
\isacommand{apply}{\isacharparenleft}drule{\isacharunderscore}tac\ x\ {\isacharequal}\ x\ \isakeyword{in}\ lem{\isacharparenright}\isanewline
|
nipkow@10654
|
204 |
\isacommand{apply}{\isacharparenleft}auto\ simp\ add{\isacharcolon}find{\isadigit{2}}{\isacharunderscore}def{\isacharparenright}\isanewline
|
nipkow@10654
|
205 |
\isacommand{done}%
|
nipkow@10654
|
206 |
\begin{isamarkuptext}%
|
nipkow@10654
|
207 |
Let us conclude this section on partial functions by a
|
nipkow@10654
|
208 |
discussion of the merits of the \isa{while} combinator. We have
|
nipkow@10654
|
209 |
already seen that the advantage (if it is one) of not having to
|
nipkow@10654
|
210 |
provide a termintion argument when defining a function via \isa{while} merely puts off the evil hour. On top of that, tail recursive
|
nipkow@10654
|
211 |
functions tend to be more complicated to reason about. So why use
|
nipkow@10654
|
212 |
\isa{while} at all? The only reason is executability: the recursion
|
nipkow@10654
|
213 |
equation for \isa{while} is a directly executable functional
|
nipkow@10654
|
214 |
program. This is in stark contrast to guarded recursion as introduced
|
nipkow@10654
|
215 |
above which requires an explicit test \isa{x\ {\isasymin}\ dom\ f} in the
|
nipkow@10654
|
216 |
function body. Unless \isa{dom} is trivial, this leads to a
|
paulson@10878
|
217 |
definition that is impossible to execute (or prohibitively slow).
|
paulson@10878
|
218 |
Thus, if you are aiming for an efficiently executable definition
|
nipkow@10654
|
219 |
of a partial function, you are likely to need \isa{while}.%
|
nipkow@10654
|
220 |
\end{isamarkuptext}%
|
nipkow@10654
|
221 |
\end{isabellebody}%
|
nipkow@10654
|
222 |
%%% Local Variables:
|
nipkow@10654
|
223 |
%%% mode: latex
|
nipkow@10654
|
224 |
%%% TeX-master: "root"
|
nipkow@10654
|
225 |
%%% End:
|