doc-src/TutorialI/Recdef/document/Induction.tex
changeset 9792 bbefb6ce5cb2
parent 9723 a977245dfc8a
child 9924 3370f6aa3200
--- a/doc-src/TutorialI/Recdef/document/Induction.tex	Fri Sep 01 18:29:52 2000 +0200
+++ b/doc-src/TutorialI/Recdef/document/Induction.tex	Fri Sep 01 19:09:44 2000 +0200
@@ -9,7 +9,7 @@
 again induction. But this time the structural form of induction that comes
 with datatypes is unlikely to work well---otherwise we could have defined the
 function by \isacommand{primrec}. Therefore \isacommand{recdef} automatically
-proves a suitable induction rule $f$\isa{.induct} that follows the
+proves a suitable induction rule $f$\isa{{\isachardot}induct} that follows the
 recursion pattern of the particular function $f$. We call this
 \textbf{recursion induction}. Roughly speaking, it
 requires you to prove for each \isacommand{recdef} equation that the property
@@ -19,7 +19,7 @@
 \isacommand{lemma}\ {\isachardoublequote}map\ f\ {\isacharparenleft}sep{\isacharparenleft}x{\isacharcomma}xs{\isacharparenright}{\isacharparenright}\ {\isacharequal}\ sep{\isacharparenleft}f\ x{\isacharcomma}\ map\ f\ xs{\isacharparenright}{\isachardoublequote}%
 \begin{isamarkuptxt}%
 \noindent
-involving the predefined \isa{map} functional on lists: \isa{map f xs}
+involving the predefined \isa{map} functional on lists: \isa{map\ f\ xs}
 is the result of applying \isa{f} to all elements of \isa{xs}. We prove
 this lemma by recursion induction w.r.t. \isa{sep}:%
 \end{isamarkuptxt}%
@@ -45,13 +45,13 @@
 definition of \isa{sep}.
 
 In general, the format of invoking recursion induction is
-\begin{ttbox}
-apply(induct_tac \(x@1 \dots x@n\) rule: \(f\).induct)
-\end{ttbox}\index{*induct_tac}%
+\begin{quote}
+\isacommand{apply}\isa{{\isacharparenleft}induct{\isacharunderscore}tac\ {\isacharparenleft}}$x@1 \dots x@n$ \isa{rule{\isacharcolon}} $f$\isa{{\isachardot}induct{\isacharparenright}}
+\end{quote}\index{*induct_tac}%
 where $x@1~\dots~x@n$ is a list of free variables in the subgoal and $f$ the
 name of a function that takes an $n$-tuple. Usually the subgoal will
 contain the term $f~x@1~\dots~x@n$ but this need not be the case. The
-induction rules do not mention $f$ at all. For example \isa{sep.induct}
+induction rules do not mention $f$ at all. For example \isa{sep{\isachardot}induct}
 \begin{isabelle}
 {\isasymlbrakk}~{\isasymAnd}a.~P~a~[];\isanewline
 ~~{\isasymAnd}a~x.~P~a~[x];\isanewline