From yannick_duchene at yahoo.fr Tue Dec 29 03:11:48 2015 From: yannick_duchene at yahoo.fr (Yannick) Date: Tue, 29 Dec 2015 04:11:48 +0100 Subject: [opentheory-users] Is OpenTheory usable with Coq? Message-ID: Hi people out there, I'm new here. May be my mind is buggy, I was sure to recall there was an OpenTheory reader/writer for Coq. Now looking at http://www.gilith.com/research/opentheory/ , I can't see it. I know there is a reader for Isabell/HOL. Unfortunately, I'm rather looking for a proof environment with a writer, as I bother about saving proofs. If this is useful, I may draw the picture. I'm learning to effectively use ATS, a language with dependent types, linear types, inductive definitions and proofs. It's a very nice language, however and for good reasons, not suited to prove properties of as an example, inductive definitions (it mainly target programming issues, that is, ensuring pre/post conditions, resources tracking and the likes). I'm planning to export inductive definition using the abstract syntax tree output ATS provides, then prove properties of these inductive definitions, outside of ATS and save these proofs in a standard format (luckily, OpenTheory exists). I had some short past experience with Isabelle/HOL and Coq. I like Isabelle/HOL for being HOL, but don't really like the language and even less like the editor. So I tough about Coq and CoqIDE, which seems more usable to me, as much the language and the IDE, although I don't really know its logic, seemingly a superset of HOL. Unfortunately, it does not seems to support OpenTheory. So may be HOL Light, but I never used it, and am afraid of writing proofs in a TTy like interface. That's about the picture. If possible, I would prefer to use Coq, just only if it can writes OpenTheory files. I welcome any comments and suggestions. Have a nice day as much as possible, and happy new year 2016. -- Yannick Duch?ne -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From ramana at member.fsf.org Tue Dec 29 12:23:44 2015 From: ramana at member.fsf.org (Ramana Kumar) Date: Tue, 29 Dec 2015 17:53:44 +0530 Subject: [opentheory-users] Is OpenTheory usable with Coq? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On 29 December 2015 at 08:41, Yannick wrote: > Hi people out there, I'm new here. > > May be my mind is buggy, I was sure to recall there was an OpenTheory > reader/writer for Coq. Now looking at > http://www.gilith.com/research/opentheory/ , I can't see it. > You might be thinking of Holide. There is a link at http://dedukti.gforge.inria.fr/, but it seems to be 404 at the moment. Ask the authors? Another possibility is https://www.lri.fr/~keller/Recherche/hollightcoq.html, but I think it's only one-way (and not the direction you need). > > I know there is a reader for Isabell/HOL. Unfortunately, I'm rather > looking for a proof environment with a writer, as I bother about saving > proofs. > I am interested in producing a writer for Isabelle/HOL eventually (some time over the next year hopefully). It could be good to combine efforts. > > If this is useful, I may draw the picture. I'm learning to effectively use > ATS, a language with dependent types, linear types, inductive definitions > and proofs. It's a very nice language, however and for good reasons, not > suited to prove properties of as an example, inductive definitions (it > mainly target programming issues, that is, ensuring pre/post conditions, > resources tracking and the likes). I'm planning to export inductive > definition using the abstract syntax tree output ATS provides, then prove > properties of these inductive definitions, outside of ATS and save these > proofs in a standard format (luckily, OpenTheory exists). I had some short > past experience with Isabelle/HOL and Coq. I like Isabelle/HOL for being > HOL, but don't really like the language and even less like the editor. So I > tough about Coq and CoqIDE, which seems more usable to me, as much the > language and the IDE, although I don't really know its logic, seemingly a > superset of HOL. Unfortunately, it does not seems to support OpenTheory. So > may be HOL Light, but I never used it, and am afraid of writing proofs in a > TTy like interface. > Writing proofs in HOL4 or HOL Light is not as frightening as you might think :) > > That's about the picture. If possible, I would prefer to use Coq, just > only if it can writes OpenTheory files. > If you work in a restricted subset of Coq, it may be possible to create a translation from Coq's proof terms to OpenTheory format. It might be worth looking into that, if you're interested. Let me know. > > I welcome any comments and suggestions. > > Have a nice day as much as possible, and happy new year 2016. > > > -- > Yannick Duch?ne > > _______________________________________________ > opentheory-users mailing list > opentheory-users at gilith.com > http://www.gilith.com/mailman/listinfo/opentheory-users > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From ramana at member.fsf.org Tue Dec 29 12:25:44 2015 From: ramana at member.fsf.org (Ramana Kumar) Date: Tue, 29 Dec 2015 17:55:44 +0530 Subject: [opentheory-users] Is OpenTheory usable with Coq? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: I should add that for HOL4 (and HOL Light, I think) there are editor-based interfaces (for Vim and for Emacs, at least) so you are not confined to using only the read-eval-print loop. On 29 December 2015 at 17:53, Ramana Kumar wrote: > On 29 December 2015 at 08:41, Yannick wrote: > >> Hi people out there, I'm new here. >> >> May be my mind is buggy, I was sure to recall there was an OpenTheory >> reader/writer for Coq. Now looking at >> http://www.gilith.com/research/opentheory/ , I can't see it. >> > > You might be thinking of Holide. There is a link at > http://dedukti.gforge.inria.fr/, but it seems to be 404 at the moment. > Ask the authors? > > Another possibility is > https://www.lri.fr/~keller/Recherche/hollightcoq.html, but I think it's > only one-way (and not the direction you need). > > >> >> I know there is a reader for Isabell/HOL. Unfortunately, I'm rather >> looking for a proof environment with a writer, as I bother about saving >> proofs. >> > > I am interested in producing a writer for Isabelle/HOL eventually (some > time over the next year hopefully). It could be good to combine efforts. > > >> >> If this is useful, I may draw the picture. I'm learning to effectively >> use ATS, a language with dependent types, linear types, inductive >> definitions and proofs. It's a very nice language, however and for good >> reasons, not suited to prove properties of as an example, inductive >> definitions (it mainly target programming issues, that is, ensuring >> pre/post conditions, resources tracking and the likes). I'm planning to >> export inductive definition using the abstract syntax tree output ATS >> provides, then prove properties of these inductive definitions, outside of >> ATS and save these proofs in a standard format (luckily, OpenTheory >> exists). I had some short past experience with Isabelle/HOL and Coq. I like >> Isabelle/HOL for being HOL, but don't really like the language and even >> less like the editor. So I tough about Coq and CoqIDE, which seems more >> usable to me, as much the language and the IDE, although I don't really >> know its logic, seemingly a superset of HOL. Unfortunately, it does not >> seems to support OpenTheory. So may be HOL Light, but I never used it, and >> am afraid of writing proofs in a TTy like interface. >> > > Writing proofs in HOL4 or HOL Light is not as frightening as you might > think :) > > >> >> That's about the picture. If possible, I would prefer to use Coq, just >> only if it can writes OpenTheory files. >> > > If you work in a restricted subset of Coq, it may be possible to create a > translation from Coq's proof terms to OpenTheory format. It might be worth > looking into that, if you're interested. Let me know. > > >> >> I welcome any comments and suggestions. >> >> Have a nice day as much as possible, and happy new year 2016. >> >> >> -- >> Yannick Duch?ne >> >> _______________________________________________ >> opentheory-users mailing list >> opentheory-users at gilith.com >> http://www.gilith.com/mailman/listinfo/opentheory-users >> >> > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From yannick_duchene at yahoo.fr Wed Dec 30 03:54:23 2015 From: yannick_duchene at yahoo.fr (Yannick) Date: Wed, 30 Dec 2015 04:54:23 +0100 Subject: [opentheory-users] Fwd: Re: Is OpenTheory usable with Coq? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: ------- Forwarded message ------- From: Yannick To: "Ramana Kumar" Cc: Subject: Re: [opentheory-users] Is OpenTheory usable with Coq? Date: Wed, 30 Dec 2015 02:44:23 +0100 I'm late, sorry, I just seen I received an answer. On Tue, 29 Dec 2015 13:23:44 +0100, Ramana Kumar wrote: > On 29 December 2015 at 08:41, Yannick wrote: >> Hi people out there, I'm new here. >> >> May be my mind is buggy, I was sure to recall there was an OpenTheory >> reader/writer for Coq. Now looking at >> http://>>www.gilith.com/research/opentheory/ , I can't see it. > > You might be thinking of Holide. There is a link at > http://dedukti.gforge.inria.fr/, but it seems to be 404 at the moment. > >Ask the authors? > > Another possibility is > https://www.lri.fr/~keller/Recherche/hollightcoq.html, but I think it's > only one-way (and not the >direction you need). > Thanks for the pointers, I will follow these tracks later. >> >> I know there is a reader for Isabell/HOL. Unfortunately, I'm rather >> looking for a proof environment with a writer, as I >>bother about >> saving proofs. > > I am interested in producing a writer for Isabelle/HOL eventually (some > time over the next year hopefully). It could be >good to combine efforts. I would be glad (modulo the time I could give it), just keep in mind I'm neither a professor nor even a student. I know HOL, and LCF intuitively, also a bit their history and how they are related (how LCF led to HOL) and know SML well enough. If you believe that's enough to be useful, then why not?? > > Writing proofs in HOL4 or HOL Light is not as frightening as you might > think :) Just started reading the HOL4 tutorial (I finally opted for HOL4 over HOL Light), I will see. I just though I may use a wrapper to be able so step forward and backward in a source, like CoqIDE do. If I do so, I will tell (oops, HOL4 related, not OpenTheory, I'm a bit out of topic). > >> >> That's about the picture. If possible, I would prefer to use Coq, just >> only if it can writes OpenTheory files. > > If you work in a restricted subset of Coq, it may be possible to create > a translation from Coq's proof terms to OpenTheory >format. It might be > worth looking into that, if you're interested. Let me know. > I just can say the same as above: if you believe I'm able to, I may. -- Yannick Duch?ne -- Yannick Duch?ne -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From yannick_duchene at yahoo.fr Wed Dec 30 03:54:44 2015 From: yannick_duchene at yahoo.fr (Yannick) Date: Wed, 30 Dec 2015 04:54:44 +0100 Subject: [opentheory-users] Fwd: Re: Is OpenTheory usable with Coq? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: ------- Forwarded message ------- From: Yannick To: "Ramana Kumar" Cc: Subject: Re: [opentheory-users] Is OpenTheory usable with Coq? Date: Wed, 30 Dec 2015 02:46:31 +0100 On Tue, 29 Dec 2015 13:25:44 +0100, Ramana Kumar wrote: > I should add that for HOL4 (and HOL Light, I think) there are > editor-based interfaces (for Vim and for Emacs, at least) so >you are > not confined to using only the read-eval-print loop. Precisely the two editors I'm afraid of :-D . Don't mind, I will setup what I need if I'm really not OK with the SML interpreter interface. -- Yannick Duch?ne -- Yannick Duch?ne -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From yannick_duchene at yahoo.fr Wed Dec 30 05:47:23 2015 From: yannick_duchene at yahoo.fr (Yannick) Date: Wed, 30 Dec 2015 06:47:23 +0100 Subject: [opentheory-users] Curl dependency not in doc Message-ID: Just a tiny thing, however which should be mentioned in http://www.gilith.com/software/opentheory/install.html : OpenTheory depends on Curl (also, resuming after installing it, still fails, one have to clean everything and restart the whole build). -- Yannick Duch?ne -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From yannick_duchene at yahoo.fr Thu Dec 31 10:54:07 2015 From: yannick_duchene at yahoo.fr (Yannick) Date: Thu, 31 Dec 2015 11:54:07 +0100 Subject: [opentheory-users] Funny copy/paste error Message-ID: A web page says: ?I strongly recommend using MLton (or Poly/ML) over Moscow ML to run opentheory, for reasons of speed?. Okay, except it's a page about Metis :-D http://www.gilith.com/software/metis/faq.html -- Yannick Duch?ne -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: