Remove and replace the coercion mechanism #433
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
The commit puts in place the same mechanism than the one for `Gospelstdlib`. The `Annotated_stdlib` uses type alias to give a logical model to the type `int`.
Use `int`'s model rather than coercion in documentation and tests.
Use the default model rather than the coercion mechanism in tests. For clarity reasons the model can be re-stated in the documentation.
Open
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
Fixes #432
This PR is in two fold:
In order to provide the default models, the PR proposes to open an
Annotated_stdlibmodule at the beginning of every module inspected by the Gospel type-checker (apart from some exceptions like itself, the OCaml standard library and the Gospel one).The default models are:
vof typeintegerfor the OCaml typeintarray_contentof type'a sequencefor the OCaml type'a arraylist_contentof type'a sequencefor the OCaml type'a listNaming is clearly open to discussion!
This is obviously increasing the verbosity of the specifications, at least the one written in the tests.
This point is clearly an argument in favor of removing the name of the models as suggested by @mrjazzybread in #392
Comments are very welcome.