leanprover / leanprover/lean4

implement ext? suggesting a rcases pattern

Open
#3,325 2 comments 0 reactions 0 assignees View on GitHub

Nobody has claimed this yet.

P-low RFC RFC accepted
Dominant language
Lean
Stars
9.2k
Forks
990
Avg merge
1d 17h
Merged PRs (30d)
175

Description

When upstreaming ext from Std in #3306, we noticed that there are todo stubs for an ext? tactic which makes suggestions about an rcases-style pattern that can be used to named the introduced arguments.

I have removed these stubs, and this issue can serve to track this TODO.

The removed syntaxes were:

-- TODO
/-- `ext1? pat*` is like `ext1 pat*` but gives a suggestion on what pattern to use -/
syntax "ext1?" (colGt ppSpace rintroPat)* : tactic
/-- `ext? pat*` is like `ext pat*` but gives a suggestion on what pattern to use -/
syntax "ext?" (colGt ppSpace rintroPat)* (" : " num)? : tactic

Contributor guide

Open the contributing guide

First steps

  1. Read the whole issue, then the project's contributing guide.
  2. Comment on the issue to say you are picking it up — it saves two people doing the same work.
  3. Fork the repository and make your change on a branch.
  4. Open a pull request that references the issue number.

Research direction

Start by reviewing the removed ext1? and ext? syntax in this issue and the upstreaming change from #3306. The work is done when both tactics can suggest an rcases-style pattern for naming introduced arguments, with behavior matching the documented intent.

Written by the indexing model from the issue text.

Assessment

Domain
compilers
Issue type
Feature
Difficulty
5/5
Estimated time
Over a week
Activity status
Stale
Clarity
Mostly clear
Newbie friendliness
25/100

Get new issues in your inbox

A short digest of beginner-friendly GitHub issues.