Implement and verify the naive translation of lazy/force to thunks #98
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
based on the latest metacoq. Add a lazy factorial test in the benchmarks
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
This is based on the latest metacoq, whose -unsafe-erasure includes a translation from cofixpoints to fix + lazy/force (yet unverified, as this requires a fair bit of knowledge about the productivity condition). So CertiCoq now supports cofixpoints when used with that pipeline. We do the lazy/force translation to lambdas/applications in the first translation phase and verify that it correctly simulates the reduction rules of lazy/force. We add a lazy factorial test in the benchmarks.