-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 7
/
HoareList.v
1179 lines (1033 loc) · 36.6 KB
/
HoareList.v
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
182
183
184
185
186
187
188
189
190
191
192
193
194
195
196
197
198
199
200
201
202
203
204
205
206
207
208
209
210
211
212
213
214
215
216
217
218
219
220
221
222
223
224
225
226
227
228
229
230
231
232
233
234
235
236
237
238
239
240
241
242
243
244
245
246
247
248
249
250
251
252
253
254
255
256
257
258
259
260
261
262
263
264
265
266
267
268
269
270
271
272
273
274
275
276
277
278
279
280
281
282
283
284
285
286
287
288
289
290
291
292
293
294
295
296
297
298
299
300
301
302
303
304
305
306
307
308
309
310
311
312
313
314
315
316
317
318
319
320
321
322
323
324
325
326
327
328
329
330
331
332
333
334
335
336
337
338
339
340
341
342
343
344
345
346
347
348
349
350
351
352
353
354
355
356
357
358
359
360
361
362
363
364
365
366
367
368
369
370
371
372
373
374
375
376
377
378
379
380
381
382
383
384
385
386
387
388
389
390
391
392
393
394
395
396
397
398
399
400
401
402
403
404
405
406
407
408
409
410
411
412
413
414
415
416
417
418
419
420
421
422
423
424
425
426
427
428
429
430
431
432
433
434
435
436
437
438
439
440
441
442
443
444
445
446
447
448
449
450
451
452
453
454
455
456
457
458
459
460
461
462
463
464
465
466
467
468
469
470
471
472
473
474
475
476
477
478
479
480
481
482
483
484
485
486
487
488
489
490
491
492
493
494
495
496
497
498
499
500
501
502
503
504
505
506
507
508
509
510
511
512
513
514
515
516
517
518
519
520
521
522
523
524
525
526
527
528
529
530
531
532
533
534
535
536
537
538
539
540
541
542
543
544
545
546
547
548
549
550
551
552
553
554
555
556
557
558
559
560
561
562
563
564
565
566
567
568
569
570
571
572
573
574
575
576
577
578
579
580
581
582
583
584
585
586
587
588
589
590
591
592
593
594
595
596
597
598
599
600
601
602
603
604
605
606
607
608
609
610
611
612
613
614
615
616
617
618
619
620
621
622
623
624
625
626
627
628
629
630
631
632
633
634
635
636
637
638
639
640
641
642
643
644
645
646
647
648
649
650
651
652
653
654
655
656
657
658
659
660
661
662
663
664
665
666
667
668
669
670
671
672
673
674
675
676
677
678
679
680
681
682
683
684
685
686
687
688
689
690
691
692
693
694
695
696
697
698
699
700
701
702
703
704
705
706
707
708
709
710
711
712
713
714
715
716
717
718
719
720
721
722
723
724
725
726
727
728
729
730
731
732
733
734
735
736
737
738
739
740
741
742
743
744
745
746
747
748
749
750
751
752
753
754
755
756
757
758
759
760
761
762
763
764
765
766
767
768
769
770
771
772
773
774
775
776
777
778
779
780
781
782
783
784
785
786
787
788
789
790
791
792
793
794
795
796
797
798
799
800
801
802
803
804
805
806
807
808
809
810
811
812
813
814
815
816
817
818
819
820
821
822
823
824
825
826
827
828
829
830
831
832
833
834
835
836
837
838
839
840
841
842
843
844
845
846
847
848
849
850
851
852
853
854
855
856
857
858
859
860
861
862
863
864
865
866
867
868
869
870
871
872
873
874
875
876
877
878
879
880
881
882
883
884
885
886
887
888
889
890
891
892
893
894
895
896
897
898
899
900
901
902
903
904
905
906
907
908
909
910
911
912
913
914
915
916
917
918
919
920
921
922
923
924
925
926
927
928
929
930
931
932
933
934
935
936
937
938
939
940
941
942
943
944
945
946
947
948
949
950
951
952
953
954
955
956
957
958
959
960
961
962
963
964
965
966
967
968
969
970
971
972
973
974
975
976
977
978
979
980
981
982
983
984
985
986
987
988
989
990
991
992
993
994
995
996
997
998
999
1000
(** * HoareList: Hoare Logic with Lists *)
Require Export SfLib.
(* ####################################################### *)
(** * Imp Programs with Lists *)
(** There are only so many numeric functions with interesting
properties that have simple proofs. (Of course, there are lots of
interesting functions on numbers and they have many interesting
properties -- this is the whole field of number theory! -- but
proving these properties often requires developing a lot of
supporting lemmas.) In order to able to write a few more programs
to reason about, we introduce here an extended version of Imp
where variables can range over both numbers and lists of numbers.
The basic operations are extended to also include taking the head
and tail of lists, and testing lists for nonemptyness.
To do this, we only need to change the definitions of [state],
[aexp], [aeval], [bexp], and [beval]. The definitions of [com] and
[ceval] can be reused verbatim, although we need to copy-and-paste
them in the context of the new definitions.
We start by repeating some material from chapter [Imp]. *)
(** ** Repeated Definitions *)
Inductive id : Type :=
Id : nat -> id.
Definition beq_id id1 id2 :=
match (id1, id2) with
(Id n1, Id n2) => beq_nat n1 n2
end.
Theorem beq_id_refl : forall i,
true = beq_id i i.
Proof.
intros. destruct i.
apply beq_nat_refl. Qed.
Theorem beq_id_eq : forall i1 i2,
true = beq_id i1 i2 -> i1 = i2.
Proof.
intros i1 i2 H.
destruct i1. destruct i2.
apply beq_nat_eq in H. subst.
reflexivity. Qed.
Theorem beq_id_false_not_eq : forall i1 i2,
beq_id i1 i2 = false -> i1 <> i2.
Proof.
intros i1 i2 H.
destruct i1. destruct i2.
apply beq_nat_false in H.
intros C. apply H. inversion C. reflexivity. Qed.
Theorem not_eq_beq_id_false : forall i1 i2,
i1 <> i2 -> beq_id i1 i2 = false.
Proof.
intros i1 i2 H.
destruct i1. destruct i2.
assert (n <> n0).
intros C. subst. apply H. reflexivity.
apply not_eq_beq_false. assumption. Qed.
Definition X : id := Id 0.
Definition Y : id := Id 1.
Definition Z : id := Id 2.
(** ** Extensions *)
(** Now we come to the key changes.
Rather than evaluating to a [nat], an [aexp] in our new language
will evaluate to a _value_ -- an element of type [val] -- which
can be either a [nat] or a list of [nat]s.
Similarly, [state]s will now map identifiers to [val]s rather than
[nat]s, so that we can store lists in mutable variables. *)
Inductive val : Type :=
| VNat : nat -> val
| VList : list nat -> val.
Definition state := id -> val.
Definition empty_state : state := fun _ => VNat 0.
Definition update (st : state) (X:id) (v : val) : state :=
fun X' => if beq_id X X' then v else st X'.
(** Imp does not have a static type system, so nothing prevents the
programmer from e.g. adding two lists or taking the head of a
number. We have to decide what to do in such nonsensical
situations.
We adopt a simple solution: if an arithmetic function is given a
list as an argument we treat the list as if it was the number
[0]. Similarly, if a list function is given a number as an
argument we treat the number as if it was [nil]. (Cf. Javascript,
where adding [3] to the empty list evaluates to [3]...)
The two functions [asnat] and [aslist] interpret [val]s in a
numeric or a list context; [aeval] calls these whenever it
evaluates an arithmetic or a list operation.*)
Definition asnat (v : val) : nat :=
match v with
| VNat n => n
| VList _ => 0
end.
Definition aslist (v : val) : list nat :=
match v with
| VNat n => []
| VList xs => xs
end.
(** Now we fill in the definitions of abstract syntax and
evaluation functions for arithmetic and boolean expressions. *)
Inductive aexp : Type :=
| ANum : nat -> aexp
| AId : id -> aexp
| APlus : aexp -> aexp -> aexp
| AMinus : aexp -> aexp -> aexp
| AMult : aexp -> aexp -> aexp
(* Four new cases: *)
| AHead : aexp -> aexp
| ATail : aexp -> aexp
| ACons : aexp -> aexp -> aexp
| ANil : aexp.
Tactic Notation "aexp_cases" tactic(first) ident(c) :=
first;
[ Case_aux c "ANum" | Case_aux c "AId" | Case_aux c "APlus"
| Case_aux c "AMinus" | Case_aux c "AMult"
| Case_aux c "AHead" | Case_aux c "ATail"
| Case_aux c "ACons" | Case_aux c "ANil" ].
Definition tail (l : list nat) :=
match l with
| x::xs => xs
| [] => []
end.
Definition head (l : list nat) :=
match l with
| x::xs => x
| [] => 0
end.
Fixpoint aeval (st : state) (e : aexp) : val :=
match e with
| ANum n => VNat n
| AId i => st i
| APlus a1 a2 => VNat (asnat (aeval st a1) + asnat (aeval st a2))
| AMinus a1 a2 => VNat (asnat (aeval st a1) - asnat (aeval st a2))
| AMult a1 a2 => VNat (asnat (aeval st a1) * asnat (aeval st a2))
(* Four new cases: *)
| ATail a => VList (tail (aslist (aeval st a)))
| AHead a => VNat (head (aslist (aeval st a)))
| ACons a1 a2 => VList (asnat (aeval st a1) :: aslist (aeval st a2))
| ANil => VList []
end.
(** We extend [bexp]s with an operation to test if a list is nonempty
and adapt [beval] acordingly. *)
Inductive bexp : Type :=
| BTrue : bexp
| BFalse : bexp
| BEq : aexp -> aexp -> bexp
| BLe : aexp -> aexp -> bexp
| BNot : bexp -> bexp
| BAnd : bexp -> bexp -> bexp
(* New case: *)
| BIsCons : aexp -> bexp.
Tactic Notation "bexp_cases" tactic(first) ident(c) :=
first;
[ Case_aux c "BTrue" | Case_aux c "BFalse" | Case_aux c "BEq"
| Case_aux c "BLe" | Case_aux c "BNot" | Case_aux c "BAnd"
| Case_aux c "BIsCons" ].
Fixpoint beval (st : state) (e : bexp) : bool :=
match e with
| BTrue => true
| BFalse => false
| BEq a1 a2 => beq_nat (asnat (aeval st a1)) (asnat (aeval st a2))
| BLe a1 a2 => ble_nat (asnat (aeval st a1)) (asnat (aeval st a2))
| BNot b1 => negb (beval st b1)
| BAnd b1 b2 => andb (beval st b1) (beval st b2)
(* New case: *)
| BIsCons a => match aslist (aeval st a) with
| _::_ => true
| [] => false
end
end.
(** ** Repeated Definitions *)
(** Now we need to repeat a little bit of low-level work from Imp.v,
plus the definitions of [com] and [ceval]. There are no
interesting changes -- it's just a matter of repeating the same
definitions, lemmas, and proofs in the context of the new
definitions of arithmetic and boolean expressions.
(Is all this cutting and pasting really necessary? No: Coq
includes a powerful module system that we could use to abstract
the repeated definitions with respect to the varying parts. But
explaining how it works would distract us from the topic at hand.)
*)
Theorem update_eq : forall n V st,
(update st V n) V = n.
Proof.
intros n V st.
unfold update.
rewrite <- beq_id_refl.
reflexivity.
Qed.
Theorem update_neq : forall V2 V1 n st,
beq_id V2 V1 = false ->
(update st V2 n) V1 = (st V1).
Proof.
intros V2 V1 n st Hneq.
unfold update.
rewrite -> Hneq.
reflexivity. Qed.
Theorem update_shadow : forall x1 x2 k1 k2 (f : state),
(update (update f k2 x1) k2 x2) k1 = (update f k2 x2) k1.
Proof.
intros x1 x2 k1 k2 f.
unfold update.
destruct (beq_id k2 k1); reflexivity. Qed.
Theorem update_same : forall x1 k1 k2 (f : state),
f k1 = x1 ->
(update f k1 x1) k2 = f k2.
Proof.
intros x1 k1 k2 f Heq.
unfold update. subst.
remember (beq_id k1 k2) as b.
destruct b.
Case "true".
apply beq_id_eq in Heqb. subst. reflexivity.
Case "false".
reflexivity. Qed.
Theorem update_permute : forall x1 x2 k1 k2 k3 f,
beq_id k2 k1 = false ->
(update (update f k2 x1) k1 x2) k3 = (update (update f k1 x2) k2 x1) k3.
Proof.
intros x1 x2 k1 k2 k3 f H.
unfold update.
remember (beq_id k1 k3) as b13.
remember (beq_id k2 k3) as b23.
apply beq_id_false_not_eq in H.
destruct b13; try reflexivity.
Case "true".
destruct b23; try reflexivity.
SCase "true".
apply beq_id_eq in Heqb13.
apply beq_id_eq in Heqb23.
subst. apply ex_falso_quodlibet. apply H. reflexivity. Qed.
(** We can keep exactly the same old definitions of [com] and
[ceval]. *)
Inductive com : Type :=
| CSkip : com
| CAss : id -> aexp -> com
| CSeq : com -> com -> com
| CIf : bexp -> com -> com -> com
| CWhile : bexp -> com -> com.
Tactic Notation "com_cases" tactic(first) ident(c) :=
first;
[ Case_aux c "SKIP" | Case_aux c "::=" | Case_aux c ";"
| Case_aux c "IFB" | Case_aux c "WHILE" ].
Notation "'SKIP'" :=
CSkip.
Notation "X '::=' a" :=
(CAss X a) (at level 60).
Notation "c1 ; c2" :=
(CSeq c1 c2) (at level 80, right associativity).
Notation "'WHILE' b 'DO' c 'END'" :=
(CWhile b c) (at level 80, right associativity).
Notation "'IFB' e1 'THEN' e2 'ELSE' e3 'FI'" :=
(CIf e1 e2 e3) (at level 80, right associativity).
Reserved Notation "c1 '/' st '||' st'" (at level 40, st at level 39).
Inductive ceval : state -> com -> state -> Prop :=
| E_Skip : forall st,
SKIP / st || st
| E_Asgn : forall st a1 n X,
aeval st a1 = n ->
(X ::= a1) / st || (update st X n)
| E_Seq : forall c1 c2 st st' st'',
c1 / st || st' ->
c2 / st' || st'' ->
(c1 ; c2) / st || st''
| E_IfTrue : forall st st' b1 c1 c2,
beval st b1 = true ->
c1 / st || st' ->
(IFB b1 THEN c1 ELSE c2 FI) / st || st'
| E_IfFalse : forall st st' b1 c1 c2,
beval st b1 = false ->
c2 / st || st' ->
(IFB b1 THEN c1 ELSE c2 FI) / st || st'
| E_WhileEnd : forall b1 st c1,
beval st b1 = false ->
(WHILE b1 DO c1 END) / st || st
| E_WhileLoop : forall st st' st'' b1 c1,
beval st b1 = true ->
c1 / st || st' ->
(WHILE b1 DO c1 END) / st' || st'' ->
(WHILE b1 DO c1 END) / st || st''
where "c1 '/' st '||' st'" := (ceval st c1 st').
Tactic Notation "ceval_cases" tactic(first) ident(c) :=
first;
[ Case_aux c "E_Skip" | Case_aux c "E_Asgn" | Case_aux c "E_Seq"
| Case_aux c "E_IfTrue" | Case_aux c "E_IfFalse"
| Case_aux c "E_WhileEnd" | Case_aux c "E_WhileLoop" ].
(* ####################################################### *)
(** * Hoare Rules *)
(** We copy verbatim the Hoare rules from Hoare.v. *)
(**
------------------------------ (hoare_asgn)
{{assn_sub X a Q}} X::=a {{Q}}
-------------------- (hoare_skip)
{{ P }} SKIP {{ P }}
{{ P }} c1 {{ Q }}
{{ Q }} c2 {{ R }}
--------------------- (hoare_seq)
{{ P }} c1;c2 {{ R }}
{{P /\ b}} c1 {{Q}}
{{P /\ ~b}} c2 {{Q}}
------------------------------------ (hoare_if)
{{P}} IFB b THEN c1 ELSE c2 FI {{Q}}
{{P /\ b}} c {{P}}
----------------------------------- (hoare_while)
{{P}} WHILE b DO c END {{P /\ ~b}}
{{P'}} c {{Q'}}
P ~~> P'
Q' ~~> Q
----------------------------- (hoare_consequence)
{{P}} c {{Q}}
*)
Definition Assertion := state -> Prop.
Definition hoare_triple (P:Assertion) (c:com) (Q:Assertion) : Prop :=
forall st st',
c / st || st' ->
P st ->
Q st'.
Notation "{{ P }} c {{ Q }}" := (hoare_triple P c Q)
(at level 90, c at next level)
: hoare_spec_scope.
Open Scope hoare_spec_scope.
Definition assn_sub X a Q : Assertion :=
fun (st : state) =>
Q (update st X (aeval st a)).
Theorem hoare_asgn : forall Q X a,
{{assn_sub X a Q}} (X ::= a) {{Q}}.
Proof.
unfold hoare_triple.
intros Q X a st st' HE HQ.
inversion HE. subst.
unfold assn_sub in HQ. assumption. Qed.
Theorem hoare_skip : forall P,
{{P}} SKIP {{P}}.
Proof.
intros P st st' H HP. inversion H. subst.
assumption. Qed.
Theorem hoare_seq : forall P Q R c1 c2,
{{Q}} c2 {{R}} ->
{{P}} c1 {{Q}} ->
{{P}} c1;c2 {{R}}.
Proof.
intros P Q R c1 c2 H1 H2 st st' H12 Pre.
inversion H12; subst.
apply (H1 st'0 st'); try assumption.
apply (H2 st st'0); assumption. Qed.
Definition bassn b : Assertion :=
fun st => (beval st b = true).
Lemma bexp_eval_true : forall b st,
beval st b = true -> (bassn b) st.
Proof.
intros b st Hbe.
unfold bassn. assumption. Qed.
Lemma bexp_eval_false : forall b st,
beval st b = false -> ~ ((bassn b) st).
Proof.
intros b st Hbe contra.
unfold bassn in contra.
rewrite -> contra in Hbe. inversion Hbe. Qed.
Theorem hoare_if : forall P Q b c1 c2,
{{fun st => P st /\ bassn b st}} c1 {{Q}} ->
{{fun st => P st /\ ~(bassn b st)}} c2 {{Q}} ->
{{P}} (IFB b THEN c1 ELSE c2 FI) {{Q}}.
Proof.
intros P Q b c1 c2 HTrue HFalse st st' HE HP.
inversion HE; subst.
Case "b is true".
apply (HTrue st st').
assumption.
split. assumption.
apply bexp_eval_true. assumption.
Case "b is false".
apply (HFalse st st').
assumption.
split. assumption.
apply bexp_eval_false. assumption. Qed.
Lemma hoare_while : forall P b c,
{{fun st => P st /\ bassn b st}} c {{P}} ->
{{P}} WHILE b DO c END {{fun st => P st /\ ~ (bassn b st)}}.
Proof.
intros P b c Hhoare st st' He HP.
(* Like we've seen before, we need to reason by induction
on He, because, in the "keep looping" case, its hypotheses
talk about the whole loop instead of just c *)
remember (WHILE b DO c END) as wcom.
ceval_cases (induction He) Case; try (inversion Heqwcom); subst.
Case "E_WhileEnd".
split. assumption. apply bexp_eval_false. assumption.
Case "E_WhileLoop".
apply IHHe2. reflexivity.
apply (Hhoare st st'); try assumption.
split. assumption. apply bexp_eval_true. assumption. Qed.
Definition assert_implies (P Q : Assertion) : Prop :=
forall st, P st -> Q st.
Notation "P ~~> Q" := (assert_implies P Q) (at level 80).
Notation "P <~~> Q" := (P ~~> Q /\ Q ~~> P) (at level 80).
Theorem hoare_consequence_pre : forall (P P' Q : Assertion) c,
{{P'}} c {{Q}} ->
P ~~> P' ->
{{P}} c {{Q}}.
Proof.
intros P P' Q c Hhoare Himp.
intros st st' Hc HP. apply (Hhoare st st').
assumption. apply Himp. assumption. Qed.
Theorem hoare_consequence_post : forall (P Q Q' : Assertion) c,
{{P}} c {{Q'}} ->
Q' ~~> Q ->
{{P}} c {{Q}}.
Proof.
intros P Q Q' c Hhoare Himp.
intros st st' Hc HP.
apply Himp.
apply (Hhoare st st').
assumption. assumption. Qed.
Theorem hoare_consequence : forall (P P' Q Q' : Assertion) c,
{{P'}} c {{Q'}} ->
P ~~> P' ->
Q' ~~> Q ->
{{P}} c {{Q}}.
Proof.
intros P P' Q Q' c Hht HPP' HQ'Q.
intros st st' Hc HP.
apply HQ'Q. apply (Hht st st'). assumption.
apply HPP'. assumption. Qed.
(* ####################################################### *)
(** ** Reasoning About Programs with Lists *)
(** Now let's look at a formal Hoare Logic proof for a program that
works with lists. We will verify the following program, which
checks if the number [Y] occurs in the list [X], and if so sets
[Z] to [1]. *)
Definition list_member :=
WHILE BIsCons (AId X) DO
IFB (BEq (AId Y) (AHead (AId X))) THEN
Z ::= (ANum 1)
ELSE
SKIP
FI;
X ::= ATail (AId X)
END.
(** The informal proof looks like this:
{{ X = l /\ Y = n /\ Z = 0 }} =>
{{ Y = n /\ exists p, p ++ X = l /\ (Z = 1 <-> appears_in n p) }}
WHILE (BIsCons X)
DO
{{ Y = n /\ (exists p, p ++ X = l /\ (Z = 1 <-> appears_in n p))
/\ (BIsCons X) }}
IFB (Y == head X) THEN
{{ Y = n
/\ (exists p, p ++ X = l /\ (Z = 1 <-> appears_in n p))
/\ (BIsCons X)
/\ Y == AHead X }} =>
{{ Y = n /\ (exists p, p ++ tail X = l
/\ (1 = 1 <-> appears_in n p)) }}
Z ::= 1
{{ Y = n
/\ (exists p, p ++ tail X = l /\ (Z = 1 <-> appears_in n p)) }}
ELSE
{{ Y = n
/\ (exists p, p ++ X = l /\ (Z = 1 <-> appears_in n p))
/\ (BIsCons X)
/\ ~ (Y == head X) }} =>
{{ Y = n
/\ (exists p, p ++ tail X = l /\ (Z = 1 <-> appears_in n p)) }}
SKIP
{{ Y = n
/\ (exists p, p ++ tail X = l /\ (Z = 1 <-> appears_in n p)) }}
FI;
{{ Y = n
/\ (exists p, p ++ tail X = l /\ (Z = 1 <-> appears_in n p)) }}
X ::= ATail X
{{ Y = n
/\ (exists p, p ++ X = l /\ (Z = 1 <-> appears_in n p)) }}
END
{{ Y = n
/\ (exists p, p ++ X = l /\ (Z = 1 <-> appears_in n p))
/\ ~ (BIsCons X) }} =>
{{ Z = 1 <-> appears_in n l }}
The only interesting part of the proof is the choice of loop invariant:
exists p, p ++ X = l /\ (Z = 1 <-> appears_in n p)
This states that at each iteration of the loop, the original list
[l] is equal to the append of the current value of [X] and some
other list [p] which is not the value of any variable in the
program, but keeps track of enough information from the original
state to make the proof go through. (Such a [p] is sometimes called
a "ghost variable"). *)
(** In order to show that such a list [p] exists, in each iteration we
add the head of [X] to the _end_ of [p]. This needs the function
[snoc], from Poly.v. *)
Fixpoint snoc {X:Type} (l:list X) (v:X) : (list X) :=
match l with
| nil => [ v ]
| cons h t => h :: (snoc t v)
end.
(** The main proof uses several lemmas about [snoc] and [++]. *)
Lemma snoc_equation : forall (A : Type) (h:A) (x y : list A),
snoc x h ++ y = x ++ h :: y.
Proof.
intros A h x y.
induction x.
Case "x = []". reflexivity.
Case "x = cons". simpl. rewrite IHx. reflexivity.
Qed.
Lemma appears_in_snoc1 : forall a l,
appears_in a (snoc l a).
Proof.
induction l.
Case "l = []". apply ai_here.
Case "l = cons". simpl. apply ai_later. apply IHl.
Qed.
Lemma appears_in_snoc2 : forall a b l,
appears_in a l ->
appears_in a (snoc l b).
Proof.
induction l; intros H; inversion H; subst; simpl.
Case "l = []". apply ai_here.
Case "l = cons". apply ai_later. apply IHl. assumption.
Qed.
Lemma appears_in_snoc3 : forall a b l,
appears_in a (snoc l b) ->
(appears_in a l \/ a = b).
Proof.
induction l; intros H.
Case "l = []". inversion H.
SCase "ai_here". right. reflexivity.
SCase "ai_later". left. assumption.
Case "l = cons". inversion H; subst.
SCase "ai_here". left. apply ai_here.
SCase "ai_later". destruct (IHl H1).
left. apply ai_later. assumption.
right. assumption.
Qed.
Lemma append_singleton_equation : forall (x : nat) l l',
(l ++ [x]) ++ l' = l ++ x :: l'.
Proof.
intros x l l'.
induction l.
reflexivity.
simpl. rewrite IHl. reflexivity.
Qed.
Lemma append_nil : forall (A : Type) (l : list A),
l ++ [] = l.
Proof.
induction l.
reflexivity.
simpl. rewrite IHl. reflexivity.
Qed.
Theorem list_member_correct : forall l n,
{{ fun st => aslist (st X) = l /\ asnat (st Y) = n /\ asnat (st Z) = 0 }}
list_member
{{ fun st => asnat (st Z) = 1 <-> appears_in n l }}.
Proof.
intros l n.
eapply hoare_consequence.
apply hoare_while with (P := fun st =>
asnat (st Y) = n
/\ exists p, p ++ aslist (st X) = l
/\ (asnat (st Z) = 1 <-> appears_in n p)).
(* The loop body preserves the invariant: *)
eapply hoare_seq.
apply hoare_asgn.
apply hoare_if.
Case "If taken".
eapply hoare_consequence_pre.
apply hoare_asgn.
intros st [[[H1 [p [H2 H3]]] H9] H10].
unfold assn_sub. split.
(* (st Y) is still n *)
rewrite update_neq; try reflexivity.
rewrite update_neq; try reflexivity.
assumption.
(* and the interesting part of the invariant is preserved: *)
(* X has to be a cons *)
remember (aslist (st X)) as x.
destruct x as [|h x'].
unfold bassn in H9. unfold beval in H9. unfold aeval in H9.
rewrite <- Heqx in H9. inversion H9.
exists (snoc p h).
rewrite update_eq.
unfold aeval. rewrite update_neq; try reflexivity.
rewrite <- Heqx.
split.
rewrite snoc_equation. assumption.
rewrite update_neq; try reflexivity.
rewrite update_eq.
split.
simpl.
unfold bassn in H10. unfold beval in H10.
unfold aeval in H10. rewrite H1 in H10.
rewrite <- Heqx in H10. simpl in H10.
rewrite (beq_nat_true _ _ H10).
intros. apply appears_in_snoc1.
intros. reflexivity.
Case "If not taken".
eapply hoare_consequence_pre. apply hoare_skip.
unfold assn_sub.
intros st [[[H1 [p [H2 H3]]] H9] H10].
split.
(* (st Y) is still n *)
rewrite update_neq; try reflexivity.
assumption.
(* and the interesting part of the invariant is preserved: *)
(* X has to be a cons *)
remember (aslist (st X)) as x.
destruct x as [|h x'].
unfold bassn in H9. unfold beval in H9. unfold aeval in H9.
rewrite <- Heqx in H9. inversion H9.
exists (snoc p h).
split.
rewrite update_eq.
unfold aeval. rewrite <- Heqx.
rewrite snoc_equation. assumption.
rewrite update_neq; try reflexivity.
split.
intros. apply appears_in_snoc2. apply H3. assumption.
intros. destruct (appears_in_snoc3 _ _ _ H).
SCase "later".
inversion H3 as [_ H3'].
apply H3'. assumption.
SCase "here (absurd)".
subst.
unfold bassn, beval, aeval in H10.
rewrite not_true_iff_false in H10.
apply beq_nat_false in H10.
rewrite <- Heqx in H10. simpl in H10.
apply ex_falso_quodlibet. apply H10. assumption.
(* The invariant holds at the start of the loop: *)
intros st [H1 [H2 H3]].
rewrite H1. rewrite H2. rewrite H3.
split.
reflexivity.
exists []. split.
reflexivity.
split; intros H; inversion H.
(* At the end of the loop the invariant implies the right thing. *)
simpl. intros st [[H1 [p [H2 H3]]] H5].
(* x must be [] *)
unfold bassn in H5. unfold beval in H5. unfold aeval in H5.
destruct (aslist (st X)) as [|h x'].
rewrite append_nil in H2.
rewrite <- H2.
assumption.
apply ex_falso_quodlibet. apply H5. reflexivity.
Qed.
(** **** Exercise: 3 stars (list_sum) *)
(** Here is a direct definition of the sum of the elements of a list,
and an Imp program that computes the sum. *)
Definition sum l := fold_right plus 0 l.
Definition sum_program :=
Y ::= ANum 0;
WHILE (BIsCons (AId X)) DO
Y ::= APlus (AId Y) (AHead (AId X)) ;
X ::= ATail (AId X)
END.
(** Provide an _informal_ proof of the following specification of
[sum_program] in the form of a decorated version of the
program. *)
Definition sum_program_spec := forall l,
{{ fun st => aslist (st X) = l }}
sum_program
{{ fun st => asnat (st Y) = sum l }}.
(* FILL IN HERE *)
(** [] **)
(** **** Exercise: 4 stars (list_reverse) *)
(** Recall the function [rev] from Poly.v, for reversing lists. *)
Fixpoint rev {X:Type} (l:list X) : list X :=
match l with
| nil => []
| cons h t => snoc (rev t) h
end.
(** Write an Imp program [list_reverse_program] that reverses
lists. Formally prove that it satisfies the following
specification:
forall l : list nat,
{{ X = l /\ Y = nil }}
list_reverse_program
{{ Y = rev l }}.
You may find the lemmas [append_nil] and [rev_equation] useful.
*)
Lemma rev_equation : forall (A : Type) (h : A) (x y : list A),
rev (h :: x) ++ y = rev x ++ h :: y.
Proof.
intros. simpl. apply snoc_equation.
Qed.
Definition list_reverse_program :=
WHILE (BIsCons (AId X)) DO
Y ::= ACons (AHead (AId X)) (AId Y);
X ::= ATail (AId X)
END.
(*
{{ X = l /\ Y = []}} =>
{{ l = rev Y ++ X}}
WHILE (BIsCons (AId X)) DO
Y ::= ACons (AHead (AId X)) (AId Y)
X ::= ATail (AId X)
END.
{{ Y = rev l }}
*)
Theorem head_cons : forall st (l : list nat),
bassn (BIsCons (AId X)) st -> aslist (st X) = head (aslist (st X)) :: tail (aslist (st X)).
Proof. intros. inversion H. induction (st X).
simpl in H1. inversion H1.
simpl. destruct l0. simpl in H1. inversion H1.
reflexivity.
Qed.
Theorem rev_snoc : forall X : Type,
forall v : X,
forall s : list X,
rev (snoc s v) = v :: (rev s).
Proof.
intros X v s.
induction s. reflexivity.
simpl. rewrite IHs. reflexivity.
Qed.
Theorem rev_involutive : forall X : Type, forall l : list X,
rev (rev l) = l.
Proof.
intros X l.
induction l. reflexivity.
simpl. rewrite rev_snoc. rewrite IHl.
reflexivity.
Qed.
Theorem list_reverse_spec : forall l : list nat,
{{fun st => aslist (st X) = l /\ aslist (st Y) = nil}}
list_reverse_program
{{fun st => aslist (st Y) = rev l}}.
Proof. intros. unfold list_reverse_program.
eapply hoare_consequence. apply hoare_while with (P:= fun st => l = rev (aslist (st Y)) ++ aslist (st X)).
eapply hoare_seq.
eapply hoare_consequence_pre. apply hoare_asgn.
unfold assn_sub. simpl. intros st H.
rewrite update_neq. apply H.
compute. reflexivity.
eapply hoare_consequence_pre. apply hoare_asgn.
unfold assn_sub. simpl. intros st H.
rewrite snoc_equation. rewrite update_neq.
rewrite <- head_cons. apply H. assumption. apply H. compute. reflexivity.
intros st H. inversion H. rewrite H1. rewrite H0. reflexivity.
intros st H. inversion H. unfold bassn in H1.
simpl in H1. induction (aslist (st X)).
rewrite H0. rewrite append_nil. rewrite rev_involutive.
reflexivity.
apply ex_falso_quodlibet. apply H1. reflexivity.
Qed.
(** [] *)
(** Finally, for a bigger example, let's redo the proof of
[list_member_correct] from above using our new tools.
Notice that the [verify] tactic leaves subgoals for each
"interesting" use of [hoare_consequence] -- that is, for each [=>]
that occurs in the decorated program, except for the ones that can
be eliminated by repeated application of a few simple automated
tactics. Each of these implications relies on a fact about lists,
for example that [l ++ [] = l]. In other words, the Hoare logic
infrastructure has taken care of the boilerplate reasoning about
the execution of imperative programs, while the user has to prove
lemmas that are specific to the problem domain (e.g. lists or
numbers). *)
(* ####################################################### *)
(** * Formal Decorated Programs *)
(** Again, the definitions are copied verbatim from Hoare.v *)
Inductive dcom : Type :=
| DCSkip : Assertion -> dcom
| DCSeq : dcom -> dcom -> dcom
| DCAsgn : id -> aexp -> Assertion -> dcom
| DCIf : bexp -> Assertion -> dcom -> Assertion -> dcom
-> Assertion-> dcom
| DCWhile : bexp -> Assertion -> dcom -> Assertion -> dcom
| DCPre : Assertion -> dcom -> dcom
| DCPost : dcom -> Assertion -> dcom.
Tactic Notation "dcom_cases" tactic(first) ident(c) :=
first;
[ Case_aux c "Skip" | Case_aux c "Seq" | Case_aux c "Asgn"
| Case_aux c "If" | Case_aux c "While"
| Case_aux c "Pre" | Case_aux c "Post" ].
Notation "'SKIP' {{ P }}"
:= (DCSkip P)
(at level 10) : dcom_scope.
Notation "l '::=' a {{ P }}"
:= (DCAsgn l a P)
(at level 60, a at next level) : dcom_scope.
Notation "'WHILE' b 'DO' {{ Pbody }} d 'END' {{ Ppost }}"
:= (DCWhile b Pbody d Ppost)
(at level 80, right associativity) : dcom_scope.
Notation "'IFB' b 'THEN' {{ P }} d 'ELSE' {{ P' }} d' 'FI' {{ Q }}"
:= (DCIf b P d P' d' Q)
(at level 80, right associativity) : dcom_scope.
Notation "'=>' {{ P }} d"
:= (DCPre P d)
(at level 90, right associativity) : dcom_scope.
Notation "{{ P }} d"
:= (DCPre P d)
(at level 90) : dcom_scope.
Notation "d '=>' {{ P }}"
:= (DCPost d P)
(at level 91, right associativity) : dcom_scope.
Notation " d ; d' "
:= (DCSeq d d')
(at level 80, right associativity) : dcom_scope.
Delimit Scope dcom_scope with dcom.
Example dec_while : dcom := (
{{ fun st => True }}
WHILE (BNot (BEq (AId X) (ANum 0)))
DO
{{ fun st => True /\ bassn (BNot (BEq (AId X) (ANum 0))) st}}
X ::= (AMinus (AId X) (ANum 1))
{{ fun _ => True }}
END
{{ fun st => True /\ ~bassn (BNot (BEq (AId X) (ANum 0))) st}} =>
{{ fun st => asnat (st X) = 0 }}
) % dcom.
Fixpoint extract (d:dcom) : com :=
match d with
| DCSkip _ => SKIP
| DCSeq d1 d2 => (extract d1 ; extract d2)
| DCAsgn X a _ => X ::= a
| DCIf b _ d1 _ d2 _ => IFB b THEN extract d1 ELSE extract d2 FI
| DCWhile b _ d _ => WHILE b DO extract d END
| DCPre _ d => extract d
| DCPost d _ => extract d
end.
Fixpoint post (d:dcom) : Assertion :=
match d with
| DCSkip P => P
| DCSeq d1 d2 => post d2
| DCAsgn X a Q => Q
| DCIf _ _ d1 _ d2 Q => Q
| DCWhile b Pbody c Ppost => Ppost
| DCPre _ d => post d
| DCPost c Q => Q
end.
Fixpoint pre (d:dcom) : Assertion :=
match d with
| DCSkip P => fun st => True
| DCSeq c1 c2 => pre c1
| DCAsgn X a Q => fun st => True
| DCIf _ _ t _ e _ => fun st => True
| DCWhile b Pbody c Ppost => fun st => True
| DCPre P c => P
| DCPost c Q => pre c
end.
Definition dec_correct (d:dcom) :=
{{pre d}} (extract d) {{post d}}.
Fixpoint verification_conditions (P : Assertion) (d:dcom) : Prop :=
match d with
| DCSkip Q =>
(P ~~> Q)
| DCSeq d1 d2 =>
verification_conditions P d1
/\ verification_conditions (post d1) d2
| DCAsgn X a Q =>
(P ~~> assn_sub X a Q)
| DCIf b P1 d1 P2 d2 Q =>
((fun st => P st /\ bassn b st) ~~> P1)
/\ ((fun st => P st /\ ~ (bassn b st)) ~~> P2)
/\ (Q = post d1) /\ (Q = post d2)
/\ verification_conditions P1 d1
/\ verification_conditions P2 d2
| DCWhile b Pbody d Ppost =>
(* post d is the loop invariant and the initial precondition *)
(P ~~> post d)
/\ (Pbody = (fun st => post d st /\ bassn b st))
/\ (Ppost = (fun st => post d st /\ ~(bassn b st)))
/\ verification_conditions Pbody d
| DCPre P' d =>
(P ~~> P') /\ verification_conditions P' d
| DCPost d Q =>
verification_conditions P d /\ (post d ~~> Q)
end.
Theorem verification_correct : forall d P,
verification_conditions P d -> {{P}} (extract d) {{post d}}.