For a solver that is designed to cope with thousands of clauses, I would be 
surprised if it suffered such a regression that it could fail for the trivial 
problems we present to it. I’m not aware of an occasion when any of the 2400+ 
occurrences have ever failed.

I would also question the claim that they are unusually unreadable. The 
attached list of theorems tends to omit a lot of routine reasoning and 
therefore lists the critical three or four facts required for the proof.

Larry

> On 26 May 2020, at 16:58, Tobias Nipkow <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
> Z3 ist not under our control. If it changes, those proofs may no longer work. 
> Hence I am very sceptical of having them in the distribution.

_______________________________________________
isabelle-dev mailing list
[email protected]
https://mailman46.in.tum.de/mailman/listinfo/isabelle-dev

Reply via email to