racket / racket/redex

Feature request: explicit derivations for moded judgments

Open
#198 9 comments 0 reactions 1 assignee View on GitHub

@wilbowma is already working on this.

Since Oct 4, 2019.

enhancement
Dominant language
Racket
Stars
112
Forks
42
PR merge metrics
No merged PRs in 30d

Description

Just noticed that you introduced modeless judgments and the ability to check explicit derivations. Nice!

But what if I want to check an explicit derivation on a moded judgment? This is useful when teaching and when debugging judgments I think ought to hold but Redex claims do not.

(Would be particularly useful if judgment-holds could tell me which step in a derivation didn't hold, instead of just giving #f, but I could probably construct that feature in user-land)

Contributor guide

No contributing guide indexed for this repository

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.

Assessment

This issue has not been assessed yet.

Get new issues in your inbox

A short digest of beginner-friendly GitHub issues.