> Did you encounter an actual problem from that situation?
> Formally, a comment is not a problem. "Fixing" such things prematurely
> is likely to break it.
Yes, there is an actual problem. I define a function via
"Function.add_function" and inspect the resulting info. As per usual
discipline this looks as follows:
val (info, (lthy', lthy)) = lthy'
|> tap print_info
|> Local_Theory.open_target |> snd
|> Function.add_function bindings specs fun_config
|> (fn (info, lthy) => prove_termination lthy (#R info))
That is, I inspect the relation as generated by the function package.
The termination proof needs to get some information about that relation
from the inductive package. However, "#R" is a term, not a const name
string. Before I close the target, it will be a free variable.
With my change, I can lookup the inductive based on the term. Otherwise,
I'd need to construct the constant name and look it up using that.
isabelle-dev mailing list