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
Thanks for the report. So the issue is just™ that the simp argument set suggested by simp? is too large, but otherwise this works as expected? So the impact of this bug is on the low side, or am I missing something?
Yes, it's "just" that simp? is suggesting a simpset which is too large. It breaks proofs, though, by unfolding too much if you don't realize what is going on and fix the simpset. Not a deal breaker, but a minor inconvenience for expert users, and can be confusing for newcomers.
Prerequisites
Please put an X between the brackets as you perform the following steps:
https://github.com/leanprover/lean4/issues
Avoid dependencies to Mathlib or Batteries.
https://live.lean-lang.org/#project=lean-nightly
(You can also use the settings there to switch to “Lean nightly”)
Description
In some situations,
simp?
creates asimp only
call wrongly unfoldinglet
variables.Context
Zulip discussion at https://leanprover.zulipchat.com/#narrow/channel/287929-mathlib4/topic/simp.3F.20adding.20let.20reduction/near/493985664
Steps to Reproduce
Run the following snippet:
Expected behavior:
simp? [e]
should suggestsimp only [e]
Actual behavior:
simp? [e]
suggestssimp only [e, d]
, pulling ind
while this is not used in thesimp
callAnother example of misbehavior (probably due to the same bug) is
where the
simp?
call unfolds tosimp only
, unless you uncommentsimp [d]
two lines above: thensimp?
unfolds tosimp only [d]
.Versions
Lean 4.16.0-nightly-2025-01-15
Impact
Add 👍 to issues you consider important. If others are impacted by this issue, please ask them to add 👍 to it.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: