You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
In the first example, the left branch succeeds, whereas in the second one, it is the right one that succeeds.
In the next three examples, the same compound tactic succeeds in each case:
example (p q r : Prop) (hp : p) : p ∨ q ∨ r :=
by repeat (first | apply Or.inl; assumption | apply Or.inr | assumption)
example (p q r : Prop) (hq : q) : p ∨ q ∨ r :=
by repeat (first | apply Or.inl; assumption | apply Or.inr | assumption)
example (p q r : Prop) (hr : r) : p ∨ q ∨ r :=
by repeat (first | apply Or.inl; assumption | apply Or.inr | assumption)
The tactic tries to solve the left disjunct immediately by assumption;
if that fails, it tries to focus on the right disjunct; and if that
doesn't work, it invokes the assumption tactic.
However, running it locally cannot solve all the subgoals.
Here is the state left unsolved
example (p q r : Prop) (hq : q) : p ∨ q ∨ r :=
/- case h p q r : Prop hq : q ⊢ q ∨ r -/by repeat (first | apply Or.inl; assumption | apply Or.inr | assumption)
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
jordane95
changed the title
compound repeat first tactic no longer solves all three permutations of \and propositions
compound repeat first tactic no longer solves all three permutations of \and propositions
Jul 7, 2024
The tactics chapter states that
However, running it locally cannot solve all the subgoals.
Here is the state left unsolved
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: