Tue, 19 Jan 2010 18:17:42 +0100 A version of hom with quantifiers.
Cezary Kaliszyk <kaliszyk@in.tum.de> [Tue, 19 Jan 2010 18:17:42 +0100] rev 900
A version of hom with quantifiers.
Sun, 17 Jan 2010 02:24:15 +0100 added permutation functions for the raw calculi
Christian Urban <urbanc@in.tum.de> [Sun, 17 Jan 2010 02:24:15 +0100] rev 899
added permutation functions for the raw calculi
Sat, 16 Jan 2010 04:23:27 +0100 fixed broken (partial) proof
Christian Urban <urbanc@in.tum.de> [Sat, 16 Jan 2010 04:23:27 +0100] rev 898
fixed broken (partial) proof
Sat, 16 Jan 2010 03:56:00 +0100 used "new" alpha-equivalence relation (according to new scheme); proved equivalence theorems and so on
Christian Urban <urbanc@in.tum.de> [Sat, 16 Jan 2010 03:56:00 +0100] rev 897
used "new" alpha-equivalence relation (according to new scheme); proved equivalence theorems and so on
Sat, 16 Jan 2010 02:09:38 +0100 liftin and lifing_tac can now lift several "and"-separated goals at once; the raw-theorems have to be given in the order of goals
Christian Urban <urbanc@in.tum.de> [Sat, 16 Jan 2010 02:09:38 +0100] rev 896
liftin and lifing_tac can now lift several "and"-separated goals at once; the raw-theorems have to be given in the order of goals
Fri, 15 Jan 2010 17:09:36 +0100 added a partial proof under which conditions rlam_rec Respects alpha...I guess something like this is true; this means the Hom lemmas need to have preconditions
Christian Urban <urbanc@in.tum.de> [Fri, 15 Jan 2010 17:09:36 +0100] rev 895
added a partial proof under which conditions rlam_rec Respects alpha...I guess something like this is true; this means the Hom lemmas need to have preconditions
Fri, 15 Jan 2010 16:13:49 +0100 tried to witness the hom-lemma with the recursion combinator from rlam....does not work yet completely
Christian Urban <urbanc@in.tum.de> [Fri, 15 Jan 2010 16:13:49 +0100] rev 894
tried to witness the hom-lemma with the recursion combinator from rlam....does not work yet completely
(0) -300 -100 -30 -10 -7 +7 +10 +30 +100 +300 +1000 tip