Commit 2c41bcee authored by Adam Chlipala's avatar Adam Chlipala

Fix typo

parent d565f371
......@@ -25,7 +25,7 @@ Set Implicit Arguments.
(** We have seen many examples so far where proof goals follow "by computation." That is, we apply computational reduction rules to reduce the goal to a normal form, at which point it follows trivially. Exactly when this works and when it does not depends on the details of Coq's %\textit{%#<i>#definitional equality#</i>#%}%. This is an untyped binary relation appearing in the formal metatheory of CIC. CIC contains a typing rule allowing the conclusion $E : T$ from the premise $E : T'$ and a proof that $T$ and $T'$ are definitionally equal.
The [cbv] tactic will help us illustrate the rules of Coq's definitional equality. We redefine the natural number predecessor function in a somewhat convoluted way and construct a manual proof that it returns [1] when applied to [0]. *)
The [cbv] tactic will help us illustrate the rules of Coq's definitional equality. We redefine the natural number predecessor function in a somewhat convoluted way and construct a manual proof that it returns [0] when applied to [1]. *)
Definition pred' (x : nat) :=
match x with
......
Markdown is supported
0% or
You are about to add 0 people to the discussion. Proceed with caution.
Finish editing this message first!
Please register or to comment