From: Christian Sternagel <c.sternagel@gmail.com>
Dear Johannes,
thanks! So I just have to wait for the next release ;)
What about the equivalent lemma for exists?
cheers
chris
From: Christian Sternagel <c.sternagel@gmail.com>
Sorry, my last reply was to fast ;)
The lemma you suggest separates the last number from the previous ones,
but I suggested a lemma that separates 0 from the remaining numbers
(since this is often useful for proving results that also talk about lists).
And the same is also useful for exists.
cheers
chris
From: Tobias Nipkow <nipkow@in.tum.de>
Christian,
I have added your lemmas:
http://isabelle.in.tum.de/repos/isabelle/diff/962c12353c67/src/HOL/Nat.thy
Tobias
smime.p7s
From: Christian Sternagel <c.sternagel@gmail.com>
Dear all,
I seem to reprove the following lemma a lot recently (which I then use
as a simp rule):
lemma all_Suc_conv: "(∀i<Suc n. P i) ⟷ P 0 ∧ (∀i<n. P (Suc i))"
using less_Suc_eq_0_disj by auto
Any chance that it might end up in the Isabelle distribution (at least I
did not find it in Isabelle2016-1)?
cheers
chris
From: Johannes Hölzl <johannes.hoelzl@gmx.de>
All_less_Suc is in the distribution:
http://isabelle.in.tum.de/repos/isabelle/rev/e44f5c123f26
Best,
Last updated: Nov 21 2024 at 12:39 UTC