Skip to content

test: change behavior of unknown tactic parsing #11312

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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom
Draft
wants to merge 5 commits into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from
Draft

test: change behavior of unknown tactic parsing #11312

wants to merge 5 commits into from
+7 −250

Conversation

@robsimmons
Copy link
Contributor

@robsimmons robsimmons commented Nov 21, 2025

No description provided.

@robsimmons robsimmons changed the title test: change behavior of unknown error parsing test: change behavior of unknown tactic parsing Nov 21, 2025
@github-actions github-actions bot added the toolchain-available A toolchain is available for this PR, at leanprover/lean4-pr-releases:pr-release-NNNN label Nov 21, 2025
@leanprover-community-bot
Copy link
Collaborator

leanprover-community-bot commented Nov 21, 2025 •
edited
Loading

Mathlib CI status (docs):

  • ❗ Batteries/Mathlib CI will not be attempted unless your PR branches off the nightly-with-mathlib branch. Try git rebase 4288aa71e0f60cc29d74878999cda3889848f224 --onto 5306a3469d20caa5f9d80384a5c1effdb14e9c67. You can force Mathlib CI using the force-mathlib-ci label. (2025-11-21 23:35:11)
  • ✅ Mathlib branch lean-pr-testing-11312 has successfully built against this PR. (2025-11-22 02:24:12) View Log

@leanprover-bot
Copy link
Collaborator

leanprover-bot commented Nov 21, 2025 •
edited
Loading

Reference manual CI status:

  • ❗ Reference manual CI will not be attempted unless your PR branches off the nightly-with-manual branch. Try git rebase 4288aa71e0f60cc29d74878999cda3889848f224 --onto d3dda9f6d4428a906c096067ecb75e432afc4615. You can force reference manual CI using the force-manual-ci label. (2025-11-21 23:35:13)
  • ❗ Reference manual CI can not be attempted yet, as the nightly-testing-2025-11-21 tag does not exist there yet. We will retry when you push more commits. If you rebase your branch onto nightly-with-manual, reference manual CI should run now. You can force reference manual CI using the force-manual-ci label. (2025-11-22 01:23:18)

@robsimmons robsimmons force-pushed the test-change-unknown-tactic branch from 58e134b to 531eb51 Compare November 22, 2025 00:24
@robsimmons
Copy link
Contributor Author

robsimmons commented Nov 22, 2025

!bench

@leanprover-radar
Copy link

leanprover-radar commented Nov 22, 2025 •
edited
Loading

Benchmark results for 531eb51 against 5306a34 are in! @robsimmons

leanprover-community-mathlib4-bot added a commit to leanprover-community/batteries that referenced this pull request Nov 22, 2025
@leanprover-community-mathlib4-bot
Update lean-toolchain for testing leanprover/lean4#11312
3be8429
leanprover-community-mathlib4-bot added a commit to leanprover-community/mathlib4-nightly-testing that referenced this pull request Nov 22, 2025
@leanprover-community-mathlib4-bot
Update lean-toolchain for testing leanprover/lean4#11312
73b4cca
@leanprover-community-bot leanprover-community-bot added the builds-mathlib CI has verified that Mathlib builds against this PR label Nov 22, 2025
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Reviewers

@kmill kmill Awaiting requested review from kmill kmill will be requested when the pull request is marked ready for review kmill is a code owner

@kim-em kim-em Awaiting requested review from kim-em kim-em will be requested when the pull request is marked ready for review kim-em is a code owner

Assignees

No one assigned

Labels

builds-mathlib CI has verified that Mathlib builds against this PR toolchain-available A toolchain is available for this PR, at leanprover/lean4-pr-releases:pr-release-NNNN

Projects

None yet

Milestone

No milestone

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants

@robsimmons @leanprover-community-bot @leanprover-bot @leanprover-radar