cek@localhost.localdomain [Sat, 24 Oct 2009 08:34:14 +0200] rev 170
Undid wrong merge
cek@localhost.localdomain [Sat, 24 Oct 2009 08:29:11 +0200] rev 169
Tried rolling back
cek@localhost.localdomain [Sat, 24 Oct 2009 08:24:26 +0200] rev 168
Cleaning the mess
cek@localhost.localdomain [Sat, 24 Oct 2009 08:09:40 +0200] rev 167
Merge
cek@localhost.localdomain [Sat, 24 Oct 2009 08:09:09 +0200] rev 166
Better tactic and simplified the proof further
Christian Urban <urbanc@in.tum.de> [Sat, 24 Oct 2009 01:33:29 +0200] rev 165
fixed problem with incorrect ABS/REP name
Cezary Kaliszyk <kaliszyk@in.tum.de> [Fri, 23 Oct 2009 18:20:06 +0200] rev 164
Stronger tactic, simpler proof.
Cezary Kaliszyk <kaliszyk@in.tum.de> [Fri, 23 Oct 2009 16:34:20 +0200] rev 163
Split Finite Set example into separate file
Cezary Kaliszyk <kaliszyk@in.tum.de> [Fri, 23 Oct 2009 16:01:13 +0200] rev 162
eqsubst_tac
Cezary Kaliszyk <kaliszyk@in.tum.de> [Fri, 23 Oct 2009 11:24:43 +0200] rev 161
Trying to get a simpler lemma with the whole infrastructure
Cezary Kaliszyk <kaliszyk@in.tum.de> [Fri, 23 Oct 2009 09:21:45 +0200] rev 160
Using RANGE tactical allows getting rid of the quotients immediately.
Cezary Kaliszyk <kaliszyk@in.tum.de> [Thu, 22 Oct 2009 17:35:40 +0200] rev 159
Further developing the tactic and simplifying the proof