2

In the development below, I get a strange error when trying to define an instance of a single-method typeclass:

Universe ARG. Definition ARG := Type@{ARG}.
Universe ARG0. Definition ARG0 := Type@{ARG0}.
Universe ARG1. Definition ARG1 := Type@{ARG1}.
Universe ARG2. Definition ARG2 := Type@{ARG2}.
Constraint ARG<ARG0, ARG0<ARG1, ARG1<ARG2.

Inductive SR: ARG := Phy | Sen | Inf | Lim.
Parameter CA: Prop.
Parameter X: SR -> CA -> ARG -> ARG.
Parameter X': SR -> CA -> ARG -> ARG0.
Parameter XP: SR -> CA -> ARG -> ARG1.
Parameter XP': SR -> CA -> ARG -> ARG2.
Inductive tri:Set := one | two | three.

Definition iX' (t:tri): SR -> CA -> ARG -> ARG2 := match t with one => X' | two => XP | three => XP' end.
Parameter gk:> forall (b:SR)(d:CA)(c:ARG), X' b d c -> iX' one b d c.
Parameter gl:> forall (b:SR)(d:CA)(c:ARG), XP b d c -> iX' two b d c.
Parameter gm:> forall (b:SR)(d:CA)(c:ARG), XP' b d c -> iX' three b d c.

Definition iX'bsko {b:tri}{s:SR}{k:CA}{o:ARG} := iX' b s k o.
Parameter foo: forall {b:tri}{s:SR}{k:CA}{o:ARG}, iX' b s k o.
Fail Check foo: forall {b:tri}{s:SR}{k:CA}{o:ARG}, iX' b s k o. (*Why?*)
Check foo: iX'bsko.
Class CONN := p5 (x y z:ARG): x -> y -> z.
Instance cco: CONN := fun x y iX'bsko (_:x) (_:y) => foo.
(* Error: "foo" has type "iX' ?b@{y0:=x0; y1:=y0} ?s@{y0:=x0; y1:=y0} ?k@{y0:=x0; y1:=y0} ?o@{y0:=x0; y1:=y0}"
while it is expected to have type "iX'bsko". *)

The cause of the error seems to be that foo doesn't have type iX'bsko, while 2 lines above foo: iX'bsko type checked. How do I solve this problem?

1 Answer 1

2

To answer your comment (*Why?*), the issue is that foo means @foo _ _ _ _. The following succeds:

Check @foo: forall {b:tri}{s:SR}{k:CA}{o:ARG}, iX' b s k o.

To answer your question, you have shot yourself in the foot by shadowing the global iX'bsko with a local opaque variable.

If you change

Instance cco: CONN := fun x y iX'bsko (_:x) (_:y) => foo.

to

Instance cco: CONN := fun x y not_really_iX'bsko' (_:x) (_:y) => foo.

you get

Error:
In environment
x : ARG
y : ARG
not_really_iX'bsko : ARG
x0 : x
y0 : y
The term "foo" has type
 "iX' ?b@{y0:=x0; y1:=y0} ?s@{y0:=x0; y1:=y0} ?k@{y0:=x0; y1:=y0}
    ?o@{y0:=x0; y1:=y0}" while it is expected to have type
 "not_really_iX'bsko".

This is not surprising. CONN is the type forall x y z : Type@{ARG}, x -> y -> z. This type has no inhabitants:

Lemma no_conn : CONN -> False.
Proof. exact (fun cco => cco True True False I I). Qed.

Perhaps you meant to make x, y, and z arguments to CONN instead, writing something like this?

Class CONN (x y z:ARG) := p5 : x -> y -> z.
Instance cco x y : CONN x y iX'bsko := fun (_:x) (_:y) => foo.

Note that this fails with a much more clear-cut error message:

The term "iX'bsko" has type "ARG2" while it is expected to have type
"ARG" (universe inconsistency).

If you instead do

Class CONN (x y z:ARG2) := p5 : x -> y -> z.
Instance cco x y : CONN x y iX'bsko := fun (_:x) (_:y) => foo.

then you get

Error: Cannot infer the implicit parameter b of iX'bsko whose type is
"tri" in environment:
x, y : ARG2
1
  • Thanks. Instance cco {b:tri}{s:SR}{k:CA}{o:ARG} x y: CONN x y (@iX'bsko b s k o) := fun (_:x)(_:y) => foo works. Can I also get a working definition w/ Class CONN := p5 (x y z:ARG2): x -> y -> z? I suppose not -- just checking
    – jaam
    Commented Oct 24, 2017 at 20:13

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.