`elab_rules : tactic` patterns require redundant information
Open
Nobody has claimed this yet.
enhancement
P-medium
- Dominant language
- Lean
- Stars
- 9.2k
- Forks
- 990
- Avg merge
- 1d 17h
- Merged PRs (30d)
- 175
Description
import Lean
syntax "foo " str : tactic
open Lean Elab
elab_rules : tactic
| `(foo $x:str) => logInfo x.getString
example : True := by
foo "hello" -- Error `tacticFoo_` has not been implemented
One has to write the elab_rules above as
elab_rules : tactic
| `(tactic| foo $x:str) => logInfo x.getString
Contributor guide
First steps
- Read the whole issue, then the project's contributing guide.
- Comment on the issue to say you are picking it up — it saves two people doing the same work.
- Fork the repository and make your change on a branch.
- Open a pull request that references the issue number.
Research direction
Start by running the minimal Lean reproduction in the issue and compare the two elab_rules : tactic patterns. Investigate how tactic syntax patterns are matched, then confirm the version without the redundant tactic| prefix allows foo "hello" to elaborate successfully.
Written by the indexing model from the issue text.
Assessment
- Domain
- compilers
- Issue type
- Bug
- Difficulty
- 3/5
- Estimated time
- 1-2 days
- Activity status
- Stale
- Clarity
- Clearly specified
- Newbie friendliness
- 35/100