prep.2 recursion Problem .. Solution
1 (* Title: todo's for isac core
2 Author: Walther Neuper 111013
3 (c) copyright due to lincense terms.
6 imports "~~/src/Doc/Prog_Prove/LaTeXsugar"
10 Legend: here + code since 200120
11 \<open>(*DOC\<close> identifies stuff dedicated for isac/Doc/Lucas_Interpreter
12 \<open>(*?!?\<close> identifies a design question
14 Distillation of "rounds of reforms":
15 \<open>TODOs from current changesets\<close> \<rightarrow> \<open>Postponed from current changeset\<close> \<rightarrow>
16 (*to be removed..*) \<rightarrow> \<open>Separated tasks\<close> (*.. to be removed*)
17 \<rightarrow> subsection of \<open>Major reforms\<close>
20 section \<open>TODOs from current changesets\<close>
22 Shift more complicated issues from \<open>Current changeset\<close> to \<open>Postponed from current changeset\<close>
24 subsection \<open>Current changeset\<close>
26 (*/------- to from -------\*)
27 (*\------- to from -------/*)
33 \item Specify.find_next_step: References.select
34 cpI = ["vonBelastungZu", "Biegelinien"]: References_Def.id
37 \item Calc.state_empty_post \<rightarrow> Calc.state_post_empty
39 \item distribute code from test/../calchead.sml
41 \item rename Tactic.Calculate -> Tactic.Evaluate
43 \item replace src/ Erls by Rule_Set.Empty
45 \item rename ptyps.sml -> specify-etc.sml
46 rename Specify -> Specify_Etc
47 rename Specify -> Specify
49 \item specific_from_prog in..end: replace o by |> (Test_Isac or Test_Some!)
51 \item cleanup ThmC in MathEngBasic
62 subsection \<open>Postponed from current changeset\<close>
66 \item make steps around SubProblem more consistent:
67 SubProblem (thy, [pbl]) is bypassed by Model_Problem, if it is 1st Tactic in a Program.
69 * the Tactic SubProblem (thy, [pbl]) creates the formula SubProblem (thy, [pbl])
71 * the Tactic Model_Problem starts Specification
73 see test/../sub-problem.sml
75 \item Specify_Step.add has dummy argument Istate_Def.Uistate -- remove down to Ctree
77 \item Step_Specify.by_tactic (Tactic.Model_Problem' (id, _, met))
78 by_tactic (Tactic.Specify_Theory' domID)
79 had very old, strange code at 11b5b8b81876
80 ?redes Model_Problem', Specify_Theory' <--> Specify_Method: Step_Specify.complet_for ?
81 INTERMED. NO REPAIR: NOT PROMPTED IN TESTS
83 \item unify code Specify.find_next_step <--> Step_Specify.by_tactic (Tactic.Specify_Method'
85 \item Isa20.implementation: 0.2.4 Printing ML values ?INSTEAD? *.TO_STRING ???
86 ??? writeln ( make_string {x = x, y = y}); ???
88 \item revise O_Model and I_Model with an example with more than 1 variant.
90 \item ctxt is superfluous in specify-phase due to type constraints from Descript.thy
92 \item Derive.do_one: TODO find code in common with complete_solve
93 Derive.embed: TODO rewrite according to CAO (+ no intermediate access to Ctree)
95 \item Solve_Check: postponed parsing input to _ option
97 \item ? "fetch-tactics.sml" from Mathengine -> BridgeLibisabelle ?
99 \item ? unify struct.Step and struct.Solve in MathEngine ?
101 \item use "Eval_Def" for renaming identifiers
103 \item why does Test_Build_Thydata.thy depend on ProgLang and not on CalcElements ?
107 \item LI.do_next (*TODO RM..*) ???
108 \item generate.sml: RM datatype edit TOGETHER WITH datatype inout
109 \item TermC.list2isalist: typ -> term list -> term .. should NOT requires typ
110 \item get_ctxt_LI should replace get_ctxt
111 \item ALL CODE: rename spec(ification) --> know(ledge), in Specification: Relation -> Knowledge
112 \item rename Base_Tool.thy <--- Base_Tools
113 \item adopt naming conventions in Knowledge: EqSystem --> Equation_System, etc
114 \item rename field scr in meth
115 \item DEL double code: nxt_specify_init_calc IN specify.sml + step-specify.sml
123 \item clarify Tactic.Subproblem (domID, pblID) as term in Pstate {act_arg, ...}
124 there it is Free ("Subproblem", "char list \<times> ..
125 instead of Const (|???.Subproblem", "char list \<times> ..
126 AND THE STRING REPRESENTATION IS STRANGE:
127 Subproblem (''Test'',
128 ??.\ <^const> String.char.Char ''LINEAR'' ''univariate'' ''equation''
132 term2str; (*defined by..*)
133 fun term_to_string''' thy t =
135 val ctxt' = Config.put show_markup false (Proof_Context.init_global thy)
136 in Print_Mode.setmp [] (Syntax.string_of_term ctxt') t end;
138 val t = @{term "aaa + bbb"}
139 val t = @{term "Subproblem (''Test'', [''LINEAR'', ''univariate'', ''equation''])"};
141 val sss = Print_Mode.setmp [] (Syntax.string_of_term @{context}) t
143 writeln sss (*.. here perfect: Subproblem (''Test'', [''LINEAR'', ''univariate'', ''equation'']) *)
148 \item cleanup fun me:
149 fun me (*(_, Empty_Tac) p _ _ = raise ERROR ("me: Empty_Tac at " ^ pos'2str p)
150 | me*) (_, tac) p _(*NEW remove*) pt =
151 + -------------------------^^^^^^
152 # see test-code.sml fun me_trace
153 use this also for me, not only for me_ist_ctxt; del. me
154 this requires much updating in all test/*
156 \item shift tests into NEW model.sml (upd, upds_envv, ..)
158 \item clarify handling of contexts ctxt ContextC
161 \item Specify/ works with thy | Interpret/ works with ctxt | MathEngine.step works with ?!?ctxt
163 \item Check_Elementwise "Assumptions": prerequisite for ^^goal
164 rm tactic Check_elementwise "Assumptions" in a way, which keeps it for Minisubpbl
165 rm Assumptions :: bool (* TODO: remove with making ^^^ idle *)
171 \item complete mstools.sml (* survey on handling contexts:
176 \item librarys.ml --> libraryC.sml + text from termC.sml
183 \item concentrate "insert_assumptions" for locate_input_tactic in "associate", ?OR? Tactic.insert_assumptions
184 DONE for find_next_step by Tactic.insert_assumptions m' ctxt
186 \item rm from "generate1" ("Detail_Set_Inst'", Tactic.Detail_Set' ?)
187 \item ?"insert_assumptions" necessary in "init_pstate" ?+++? in "applicable_in" ?+++? "associate"
190 \item DO DELETIONS AFTER analogous concentrations in find_next_step
193 \item ? what is the difference headline <--> cascmd in
194 Subproblem' (spec, oris, headline, fmz_, context, cascmd)
195 \item Substitute' what does "re-calculation mean in the datatype comment?
197 \item inform: TermC.parse (ThyC.get_theory "Isac_Knowledge") istr --> parseNEW context istr
199 \item unify/clarify stac2tac_ |
202 \item extract common code from associate.. stac2tac_xxx
203 \item rename LItool.tac_from_prog -> Tactic.from_prog_tac ? Solve_Tac.from_prog_tac,
208 \item unify in signature LANGUAGE_TOOLS =\\
209 val pblterm: ThyC.id -> Problem.id -> term vvv vvv\\
210 val subpbl: string -> string list -> term unify with ^^^
212 \item Telem.safe is questionable: has it been replaced by Safe_Step, Not_Derivable, Helpless, etc?
213 Note: replacement of Istate.safe by Istate.appy_ didn't care much about Telem.safe.
214 If Telem.safe is kept, consider merge with CTbasic.ostate
216 \item remove find_next_step from solve Apply_Method';
217 this enforces Pos.at_first_tactic, which should be dropped, too.
223 subsection \<open>Postponed --> Major reforms\<close>
228 \item make parser mutually recursive for Problem .. Solution
229 preps. in Test_Parse_Isac:
231 subsubsection "problem_mini" shows a principal issue with recursive parsing
232 probably due to !2! arguments of parser (as shown in Cookbook)
233 Test_Parsers_Cookbook:
234 (* recursive parser p.140 \<section>6.1 adapted to tokens: *) shows differences,
235 which might help understanding the principal issue
236 see also Test_Parsers subsection "recursive parsing"
240 \item revisit bootstrap Calcelements. rule->calcelems->termC
241 would be nice, but is hard: UnparseC.terms -> TermC.s_to_string
243 \item replace all Ctree.update_* with Ctree.cupdate_problem
245 \item rename (ist as {eval, ...}) -> (ist as {eval_rls, ...})
247 \item exception PROG analogous to TERM
249 \item sig/struc ..elems --> ..elem
251 \item distille CAS-command, CAScmd, etc into a struct
253 \item check location of files:
254 test/Tools/isac/Interpret/ptyps.thy
255 test/Tools/isac/Specify.ptyps.sml
257 \item check occurences of Atools in src/ test/
258 \item Const ("Atools.pow", _) ---> Const ("Base_Tool.pow", _)
262 \item Diff.thy: differentiateX --> differentiate after removal of script-constant
263 \item Test.thy: met_test_sqrt2: deleted?!
265 \item Rewrite_Ord.rew_ord' := overwritel (! Rewrite_Ord.rew_ord', (*<<<---- use Know_Store.xxx, too*)
267 \item automatically extrac rls from program-code
268 ? take ["SignalProcessing", "Z_Transform", "Inverse_sub"] as an example ?
270 \item finish output of LItool.trace with Check_Postcond (useful for SubProblem)
272 \item replace Rule_Set.empty by Rule_Set.Empty
273 latter is more clear, but replacing ***breaks rewriting over all examples***,
274 e.g. see ERROR: rewrite__set_ called with 'Erls' for 'precond_rootpbl x'
275 in Minisubplb/200-start-method-NEXT_STEP.sml:
276 (*+* )------- in f3cac3053e7b (Rule_Set.empty just renamed, NOT deleted) we had
278 (*+*) Rls {calc = [], erls = Erls, errpatts = [], id = "empty", preconds = [], rew_ord =
279 (*+*) ("dummy_ord", fn), rules = [], scr = Empty_Prog, srls = Erls}:
280 (*+*).. THIS IS Rule_Set.empty, BUT IT DID not CAUSE ANY ERROR !
281 (*+*)------- WITH Rule_Set.empty REMOVED (based on f3cac3053e7b) we had
282 (*+*)val Empty = prls (* <---ERROR: rewrite__set_ called with 'Erls' for 'precond_rootpbl x' *)
283 ( *+*)val ["sqroot-test", "univariate", "equation", "test"] = cpI
284 THAT INDICATES, that much rewriting/evaluating JUST WORKED BY CHANCE?!?
295 section \<open>Major reforms\<close>
298 subsection \<open>Exception Size raised\<close>
300 During update Isabelle2018 --> Isabelle2019 we noticed, that
301 "isabelle build" uses resources more efficiently than "isabelle jedit".
302 The former works, but the latter causes
304 \item "Exception- Size raised"
306 \item "exception Size raised (line 169 of "./basis/LibrarySupport.sml")"
307 in test/../biegelinie-*.xml.
309 This has been detected after changeset (30cd47104ad7) "lucin: reorganise theories in ProgLang".
311 Find tools to investigate the Exception, and find ways around it eventually.
313 subsection \<open>Cleanup & review signatures wrt. implementation.pdf canonical argument order\<close>
316 \item there are comments in several signatures
317 \item ML_file "~~/src/Tools/isac/Interpret/specification-elems.sml" can be (almost) deleted
318 \item src/../Frontend/: signatures missing
322 subsection \<open>overall structure of code\<close>
325 \item try to separate Isac_Knowledge from MathEngine
326 common base: Knowledge_Author / ..??
328 \item ML_file "~~/src/Tools/isac/Interpret/ctree.sml" (*shift to base in common with Interpret*)
334 subsection \<open>Separate MathEngineBasic/ Specify/ Interpret/ MathEngine/\<close>
339 \item re-organise code for Interpret
341 \item Step*: Step_Specify | Step_Solve | Step DONE
343 \item Prog_Tac: fun get_first_argument takes both Prog_Tac + Program --- wait for separate Tactical
344 then shift into common descendant
349 \item ??????????? WHY CAN LI.by_tactic NOT BE REPLACED BY Step_Solve.by_tactic ???????????
354 subsection \<open>Review modelling- + specification-phase\<close>
360 \item check match between args of partial_function and model-pattern of meth;
361 provide error message.
363 \item "--- hack for funpack: generalise handling of meths which extend problem items ---"
365 \item see several locations of hack in code
366 \item these locations are NOT sufficient, see
367 test/../biegelinie-3.sml --- IntegrierenUndKonstanteBestimmen2: Bsp.7.70. auto ---
368 \item "fun associate" "match_ags ..dI" instead "..pI" breaks many tests, however,
369 this would be according to survey Notes (3) in src/../calchead.sml.
371 \item see "failed trial to generalise handling of meths"98298342fb6d
372 \item abstract specify + nxt_specif to common aux-funs;
373 see e.g. "--- hack for funpack: generalise handling of meths which extend problem items ---"
375 \item type model = itm list ?
376 \item review survey Notes in src/../calchead.sml: they are questionable
377 \item review copy-named, probably two issues commingled
379 \item special handling of "#Find#, because it is not a formal argument of partial_function
380 \item special naming for solutions of equation solving: x_1, x_2, ...
384 \item this has been written in one go:
386 \item reconsidering I_Model.max_vt, use problem with meth ["DiffApp", "max_by_calculus"]
387 \item reconsider add_field': where is it used for what? Shift into mk_oris
388 \item reconsider match_itms_oris: where is it used for what? max_vt ONLY???
389 \item in Specify_Method search root-oris for items (e.g. "errorBound"), #1# in survey
390 \item Specify_Problem, Specify_Method: check respective identifiers after re-Specify_
391 (relevant for pre-condition)
392 \item unify match_ags to mk_oris1..N with different args (fmz | pat list, pbl | meth
397 subsection \<open>taci list, type step\<close>
399 taci was, most likely, invented to make "fun me" more efficient by avoiding duplicate rewrite,
400 and probably, because the Kernel interface separated setNextTactic and applyTactic.
401 Both are no good reasons to make code more complicated.
403 !!! taci list is used in do_next !!!
407 \item can lev_on_total replace lev_on ? ..Test_Isac_Short + rename lev_on_total -> lev_on
409 \item Step* functions should return Calc.T instead of Calc.state_post
411 \item states.sml: check, when "length tacis > 1"
412 \item in Test_Isac.thy there is only 1 error in Interpret/inform.sml
413 \item (*WN190713 REMOVE: "creating a new node" was never implemented for more than one node?!?
415 \item brute force setting all empty ([], [], ptp) works!?! but ptp causes errors -- investigate!
419 subsection \<open>Ctree\<close>
422 # mixture pos' .. pos in cappend_*, append_* is confusing
423 # existpt p pt andalso Tactic.is_empty DIFFERENT IN append_*, cappend_* is confusing
424 "exception PTREE "get_obj: pos =" ^^^^^: ^^^^ due to cut !!!
425 NOTE: exn IN if..andalso.. IS NOT!!! DETECTED, THIS is confusing
426 see test/../--- Minisubpbl/800-append-on-Frm.sml ---
427 # ?!? "cut branches below cannot be decided here" in append_atomic
428 # sign. of functions too different ?!?canonical arg.order ?!?
431 \item remove update_branch, update_*? -- make branch, etc args of append_*
433 \item close sig Ctree, contains cappend_* ?only? --- ?make parallel to ?Pide_Store?
435 \item unify args to Ctree.state (pt, p)
436 \item fun update_env .. repl_env \<rightarrow>updatempty
443 subsection \<open>replace theory/thy by context/ctxt\<close>
447 \item Specify/ works with thy | Interpret/ works with ctxt | MathEngine.step works with ?!?ctxt
448 special case: Tactic.Refine_Problem
450 \item theory can be retrieved from ctxt by Proof_Context.theory_of
452 \item cleaup the many conversions string -- theory
453 \item make dest_spec --> (theory, pblID, metID) ?+ common_subthy ?
454 \item 1. Rewrite.eval_true_, then
455 LItool.check_leaf, Rewrite.eval_prog_expr, Step.add, LItool.tac_from_prog.
457 let val thy = ThyC.get_theory "Isac_Knowledge";(*TODO*)
460 \item in locate_input_tactic .. ?scan_dn1?; Program.is_eval_expr .use Term.exists_Const
461 \item push srls into pstate
462 \item lucas-intrpreter.locate_input_tactic: scan_to_tactic1 srls tac cstate (progr, Rule_Set.Empty)
467 subsection \<open>Rfuns, Begin_/End_Detail', Rrls, Istate\<close>
469 remove refactor Rfuns, Rule.Prog, Rule.Empty_Prog, RrlsState: this is a concept never brought to work.
470 Clarify relation to reverse rewriting!
472 \item separate mut.recursion program with rule and rls by deleting fild scr in rls
473 (possible since CS 43160c1e775a
474 ` "replace Prog. in prep_rls by Auto_Prog.gen, which generates Prog. on the fly" )
476 \item probably only "normal_form" seems to be needed
477 \item deleted Rfuns in NEW "locate_input_tactic": no active test for "locate_rule"
478 but that seems desirable
479 \item ?how is the relation to reverse-rewriting ???
480 \item "Rfuns" markers in test/../rational
482 \item datatype istate (Istate.T): remove RrlsState, pstate: use Rrls only for creating results beyond
483 rewriting and/or respective intermediate steps (e.g. cancellation of fractions).
484 Thus we get a 1-step-action which does NOT require a state beyond istate/pstate.
485 Thus we drastically reduce complexity, also get rid of "fun from_pblobj_or_detail_calc" , etc.
486 \item debug ^^^ related: is there an occurence of Steps with more than 1 element?
488 \item and do_next (* WN1907: ?only for Begin_/End_Detail' DEL!!!*)
490 \item shouldn't go Rfuns from Rewrite --> Rewrite_Set; they behave similar to "fun interSteps" ?
492 \item ?finally Prog could go from Calcelems to ProgLang?
495 subsection \<open>Inverse_Z_Transform.thy\<close>
498 \item\label{new-var-rhs} rule1..6, ruleZY introduce new variables on the rhs of the rewrite-rule.
499 ? replace rewriting with substitution ?!?
500 The problem is related to the decision of typing for "d_d" and making bound variables free (while
501 shifting specific handling in equation solving etc. to the meta-logic).
502 \item Find "stepResponse (x[n::real]::bool)" is superfluous, because immediately used by
503 rewrite-rules; see \ref{new-var-rhs}.
504 \item Reconsider whole problem:
505 input only the polynomial as argument of partial_function, in ([1], Frm) compile lhs "X z" ?
508 subsection \<open>Adopt Isabelle's numerals for Isac\<close>
511 \item replace numerals of type "real" by "nat" in some specific functions from ListC.thy
512 and have both representations in parallel for "nat".
517 subsection \<open>Redesign equation solver\<close>
519 Existing solver is structured along the WRONG assumption,
520 that Poly.thy must be the LAST thy among all thys involved -- while the opposite is the case.
522 Preliminary solution: all inappropriately located thms are collected in Base_Tools.thy
524 subsection \<open>Finetunig required for xmldata in kbase\<close>
526 See xmldata https://intra.ist.tugraz.at/hg/isac/rev/5b222a649390
527 and in kbase html-representation generated from these xmldata.
528 Notes in ~~/xmldata/TODO.txt.
531 section \<open>Hints for further development\<close>
534 subsection \<open>Coding standards & some explanations for math-authors\<close>
535 text \<open>copy from doc/math-eng.tex WN.28.3.03
536 WN071228 extended\<close>
538 subsubsection \<open>Identifiers\<close>
539 text \<open>Naming is particularily crucial, because Isabelles name space is global, and isac does
540 not yet use the novel locale features introduces by Isar. For instance, {\tt probe} sounds
541 reasonable as (1) a description in the model of a problem-pattern, (2) as an element of the
542 problem hierarchies key, (3) as a socalled CAS-command, (4) as the name of a related script etc.
543 However, all the cases (1)..(4) require different typing for one and the same
544 identifier {\tt probe} which is impossible, and actually leads to strange errors
545 (for instance (1) is used as string, except in a script addressing a Subproblem).
547 These are the preliminary rules for naming identifiers>
549 \item [elements of a key] into the hierarchy of problems or methods must not contain
550 capital letters and may contain underscrores, e.g. {\tt probe, for_polynomials}.
551 \item [descriptions in problem-patterns] must contain at least 1 capital letter and
552 must not contain underscores, e.g. {\tt Probe, forPolynomials}.
553 \item [CAS-commands] follow the same rules as descriptions in problem-patterns above, thus
554 beware of conflicts~!
555 \item [script identifiers] always end with {\tt Program}, e.g. {\tt ProbeScript}.
559 %WN071228 extended\<close>
561 subsubsection \<open>Rule sets\<close>
562 text \<open>The actual version of the coding standards for rulesets is in {\tt /IsacKnowledge/Atools.ML
563 where it can be viewed using the knowledge browsers.
565 There are rulesets visible to the student, and there are rulesets visible (in general) only for
566 math authors. There are also rulesets which {\em must} exist for {\em each} theory;
567 these contain the identifier of the respective theory (including all capital letters)
568 as indicated by {\it Thy} below.
571 \item [norm\_{\it Thy}] exists for each theory, and {\em efficiently} calculates a
572 normalform for all terms which can be expressed by the definitions of the respective theory
573 (and the respective parents).
574 \item [simplify\_{\it Thy}] exists for each theory, and calculates a normalform for all terms
575 which can be expressed by the definitions of the respective theory (and the respective parents)
576 such, that the rewrites can be presented to the student.
577 \item [calculate\_{\it Thy}] exists for each theory, and evaluates terms with
578 numerical constants only (i.e. all terms which can be expressed by the definitions of
579 the respective theory and the respective parent theories). In particular, this ruleset includes
580 evaluating in/equalities with numerical constants only.
581 WN.3.7.03: may be dropped due to more generality: numericals and non-numericals
582 are logically equivalent, where the latter often add to the assumptions
583 (e.g. in Check_elementwise).
586 The above rulesets are all visible to the user, and also may be input;
587 thus they must be contained in {\tt Theory_Data} (KEStore_Elems.add_rlss,
588 KEStore_Elems.get_rlss). All these rulesets must undergo a preparation
589 using the function {\tt prep_rls'}, which generates a script for stepwise rewriting etc.
590 The following rulesets are used for internal purposes and usually invisible to the (naive) user:
597 {\tt Rule_Set.append_rules, Rule_Set.merge, remove_rls} TODO
600 subsection \<open>get proof-state\<close>
602 Re: [isabelle] Programatically get "this"
603 ----------------------------------------------------
604 So here is my (Makarius') version of your initial example, following these principles:
610 val ctxt = @{context};
613 Name_Space.full_name (Proof_Context.naming_of ctxt) (Binding.name Auto_Bind.thisN);
614 val this = #thms (the (Proof_Context.lookup_fact ctxt this_name));
619 subsection \<open>write Specification to jEdit\<close>
621 Re: [isabelle] Printing terms with type annotations
622 ----------------------------------------------------
623 On 06/02/2019 17:52, Moa Johansson wrote:
625 > I’m writing some code that should create a snippet of Isar script.
627 This is how Sledgehammer approximates this:
629 http://isabelle.in.tum.de/repos/isabelle/file/Isabelle2018/src/HOL/Tools/Sledgehammer/sledgehammer_isar_proof.ML#l299
631 (The module name already shows that the proper terminology is "Isar
632 proof" (or "Isar proof text"). Proof scripts are a thing from the past,
633 before Isar. You can emulate old-style proof scripts via a sequence of
634 'apply' commands, but this is improper Isar.)
636 Note that there is no standard function in Isabelle/Pure, because the
637 problem to print just the right amount of type information is very
638 complex and not fully solved. One day, after 1 or 2 rounds of
639 refinements over the above approach, it might become generally available.
641 subsection \<open>follow Isabelle conventions (*Does not yet work in Isabelle2018\<close>
643 isabelle update -u path_cartouches
644 isabelle update -u inner_syntax_cartouches
646 section \<open>Questions to Isabelle experts\<close>
649 \item ad ERROR Undefined fact "all_left" in Test_Isac: error-pattern.sml
650 Undefined fact: "xfoldr_Nil" inssort.sml
651 (* probably two different reasons:
653 (*WN0509 compare PolyEq.all_left "[|Not(b=!=0)|] ==> (a = b) = (a - b = 0)"*)
654 all_left: "[|Not(b=!=0)|] ==> (a=b) = (a+(-1)*b=0)" and
657 (*WN0509 compare LinEq.all_left "[|Not(b=!=0)|] ==> (a=b) = (a+(-1)*b=0)"*)
658 all_left: "[|Not(b=!=0)|] ==> (a = b) = (a - b = 0)" and
660 test/../partial_fractions.sml
661 (*[7], Met*)val (p,_,f,nxt,_,pt) = me nxt p [] pt; (*nxt = Apply_Method ["PolyEq", "normalise_poly"])*)
662 (*[7, 1], Frm*)val (p,_,f,nxt,_,pt) = me nxt p [] pt; (*nxt = Rewrite ("all_left", "\<not> ?b =!= 0 \<Longrightarrow> (?a = ?b) = (?a - ?b = 0)"))*)
664 test/../mathengine-stateless.sml
665 (*if ThmC.string_of_thm @ {thm rnorm_equation_add} = "\<not> ?b =!= 0 \<Longrightarrow> (?a = ?b) = (?a + - 1 * ?b = 0)"
666 then () else error "string_of_thm changed";*)
668 (*---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------*)
670 primrec xfoldr :: "('a \<Rightarrow> 'b \<Rightarrow> 'b) \<Rightarrow> 'a xlist \<Rightarrow> 'b \<Rightarrow> 'b" where
671 xfoldr_Nil: "xfoldr f {|| ||} = id" |
672 xfoldr_Cons: "xfoldr f (x @# xs) = f x \<circ> xfoldr f xs"
675 srls = Rule_Set.empty, calc = [], rules = [
676 Rule.Thm ("xfoldr_Nil",(*num_str*) @{thm xfoldr_Nil} (* foldr ?f [] = id *)),
680 \item ?OK Test_Isac_Short with
681 LI.by_tactic tac (get_istate_LI pt p, get_ctxt_LI pt p) ptp
683 LI.by_tactic tac (Istate.empty, ContextC.empty) ptp
686 \item test from last CS with outcommented re-def of code ->
687 -> \<open>further tests additional to src/.. files\<close>
688 ADDTESTS/redefined-code.sml
690 \item efb749b79361 Test_Some_Short.thy has 2 errors, which disappear in thy ?!?:
691 ML_file "Interpret/error-pattern.sml" Undefined fact: "all_left"
692 ML_file "Knowledge/inssort.sml" Undefined fact: "xfoldr_Nil"
694 \item what is the actual replacement of "hg log --follow" ?
696 \item how HANDLE these exceptions, e.g.:
697 Syntax.read_term ctxt "Randbedingungen y 0 = (0::real), y L = 0, M_b 0 = 0, M_b L = 0]"
700 Failed to parse term"
702 \item how cope with "exception Size raised (line 171 of "./basis/LibrarySupport.sml")"
703 e.g. in test/Interpret/lucas-interpreter.sml
709 section \<open>For copy & paste\<close>
727 subsection \<open>xxx\<close>
728 subsubsection \<open>xxx\<close>