Tue, 24 Nov 2009 08:36:28 +0100 Another theorem for which the new regularize differs from old one, so the goal is not proved. But it seems, that the new one is better.
Cezary Kaliszyk <kaliszyk@in.tum.de> [Tue, 24 Nov 2009 08:36:28 +0100] rev 356
Another theorem for which the new regularize differs from old one, so the goal is not proved. But it seems, that the new one is better.
Tue, 24 Nov 2009 08:35:04 +0100 More fixes for inj_REPABS
Cezary Kaliszyk <kaliszyk@in.tum.de> [Tue, 24 Nov 2009 08:35:04 +0100] rev 355
More fixes for inj_REPABS
Tue, 24 Nov 2009 01:36:50 +0100 addded a tactic, which sets up the three goals of the `algorithm'
Christian Urban <urbanc@in.tum.de> [Tue, 24 Nov 2009 01:36:50 +0100] rev 354
addded a tactic, which sets up the three goals of the `algorithm'
Mon, 23 Nov 2009 23:09:03 +0100 fixed the error by a temporary fix (the data of the eqivalence relation should be only its name)
Christian Urban <urbanc@in.tum.de> [Mon, 23 Nov 2009 23:09:03 +0100] rev 353
fixed the error by a temporary fix (the data of the eqivalence relation should be only its name)
(0) -300 -100 -30 -10 -4 +4 +10 +30 +100 +300 +1000 tip