Skip to content

feat: Simp, made simple #98

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Open
wants to merge 29 commits into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

YaelDillies
Copy link
Collaborator

This is the second part of #97.

Co-authored-by: Paul Lezeau [email protected]

@YaelDillies YaelDillies force-pushed the how-to-write-a-simproc branch from 5ed721a to 2feca6c Compare April 16, 2025 10:30
@YaelDillies YaelDillies changed the title feat: How to write a simproc feat: Simp, made simple Apr 19, 2025
YaelDillies pushed a commit that referenced this pull request May 26, 2025
This PR adds the first blog post in a series of three to introduce the
concept of simprocs and explain how to write them.

The second blog post can be found here: #98

Co-authored-by : Yaël Dillies <[email protected]>
@bryangingechen
Copy link
Contributor

Part 1 references this post, so maybe it can also be updated to have working links pointing here too.

```
Note: The above snippet is a simplification and the constructors as shown actually belong to `Lean.TransformStep`, which `Lean.Meta.Simp.DStep` is an `abbrev` of.

<span style="color:red">**(Yaël): Why is there a mismatch in docstrings between `Step.continue` and `DStep.continue`? [Zulip](https://leanprover.zulipchat.com/#narrow/channel/270676-lean4/topic/Simp.2EStep.2Econtinue.20vs.20Simp.2EDStep.2Econtinue/with/509056271)**</span>
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Do you want to remove this?

@YaelDillies YaelDillies force-pushed the how-to-write-a-simproc branch 2 times, most recently from ed3714e to 04f3d50 Compare June 3, 2025 17:52
@YaelDillies YaelDillies force-pushed the how-to-write-a-simproc branch from 04f3d50 to f7aa206 Compare June 8, 2025 14:06
Copy link

@edegeltje edegeltje left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

thx for writing this

Co-authored-by: blizzard_inc <[email protected]>
For example, `simp [foo, -bar]` means "Simplify using the standard simp lemmas/simprocs except `bar`, with `foo` added".

A perhaps surprising fact is that every simp lemma is internally turned into a simproc for `simp`'s consumption.
From then on, we will refer to simp lemmas/simprocs as *procedures*.
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Suggested change
From then on, we will refer to simp lemmas/simprocs as *procedures*.
From now on, we will refer to simp lemmas/simprocs as *procedures*.

```

`simp` does not consume bare elements of type `Simproc`.
Instead, a simproc is an element of type `Simproc` annotated with tbe extra data mentioned in the overview subsection, like whether the simproc is `pre` or `post`.
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

The section on Step is great, and contains a lot of detail. These latter sections seem somewhat rushed and the ending of the blogpost feels abrupt to me.
For example, this sentence about annotations with extra data... could that be accompanied by a code block that shows exactly what is going on?

And would it make sense to give the exact definition of the simpM monad, and add a bit more detail on it?

Maybe you could even end with a little cliff hanger about what will happen in the final blogpost?

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Sounds good! I'm planning on spending some extra time adding stuff about SimpM to the post this coming month.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

8 participants