diff -r 000000000000 -r a5a9c433f639 src/LCF/fix.ML
--- /dev/null	Thu Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 +0000
+++ b/src/LCF/fix.ML	Thu Sep 16 12:20:38 1993 +0200
@@ -0,0 +1,106 @@
+signature FIX =
+sig
+  val adm_eq: thm
+  val adm_not_eq_tr: thm
+  val adm_not_not: thm
+  val not_eq_TT: thm
+  val not_eq_FF: thm
+  val not_eq_UU: thm
+  val induct2: thm
+  val induct_tac: string -> int -> tactic
+  val induct2_tac: string*string -> int -> tactic
+end;
+
+structure Fix:FIX =
+struct
+
+val adm_eq = prove_goal LCF.thy "adm(%x.t(x)=u(x)::'a::cpo)"
+	(fn _ => [rewrite_goals_tac [eq_def],
+		  REPEAT(rstac[adm_conj,adm_less]1)]);
+
+val adm_not_not = prove_goal LCF.thy "adm(P) ==> adm(%x.~~P(x))"
+	(fn prems => [simp_tac (LCF_ss addsimps prems) 1]);
+
+
+val tac = rtac tr_induct 1 THEN REPEAT(simp_tac LCF_ss 1);
+
+val not_eq_TT = prove_goal LCF.thy "ALL p. ~p=TT <-> (p=FF | p=UU)"
+	(fn _ => [tac]) RS spec;
+
+val not_eq_FF = prove_goal LCF.thy "ALL p. ~p=FF <-> (p=TT | p=UU)"
+	(fn _ => [tac]) RS spec;
+
+val not_eq_UU = prove_goal LCF.thy "ALL p. ~p=UU <-> (p=TT | p=FF)"
+	(fn _ => [tac]) RS spec;
+
+val adm_not_eq_tr = prove_goal LCF.thy "ALL p::tr.adm(%x. ~t(x)=p)"
+	(fn _ => [rtac tr_induct 1,
+	REPEAT(simp_tac (LCF_ss addsimps [not_eq_TT,not_eq_FF,not_eq_UU]) 1 THEN
+               REPEAT(rstac [adm_disj,adm_eq] 1))]) RS spec;
+
+val adm_lemmas = [adm_not_free,adm_eq,adm_less,adm_not_less,adm_not_eq_tr,
+		  adm_conj,adm_disj,adm_imp,adm_all];
+
+fun induct_tac v i = res_inst_tac[("f",v)] induct i THEN
+		     REPEAT(rstac adm_lemmas i);
+
+
+val least_FIX = prove_goal LCF.thy "f(p) = p ==> FIX(f) << p"
+	(fn [prem] => [induct_tac "f" 1, rtac minimal 1, strip_tac 1,
+			stac (prem RS sym) 1, etac less_ap_term 1]);
+
+(*Generates unification messages for some reason*)
+val lfp_is_FIX = prove_goal LCF.thy
+	"[| f(p) = p; ALL q. f(q)=q --> p << q |] ==> p = FIX(f)"
+	(fn [prem1,prem2] => [rtac less_anti_sym 1,
+			      rtac (FIX_eq RS (prem2 RS spec RS mp)) 1,
+			      rtac least_FIX 1, rtac prem1 1]);
+
+val ffix = read_instantiate [("f","f::?'a=>?'a")] FIX_eq;
+val gfix = read_instantiate [("f","g::?'a=>?'a")] FIX_eq;
+val ss = LCF_ss addsimps [ffix,gfix];
+
+(* Do not use prove_goal because the result is ?ed which leads to divergence
+   when submitted as an argument to SIMP_THM *)
+(*
+local
+val thm = trivial(Sign.read_cterm(sign_of LCF.thy)
+        ("<FIX(f),FIX(g)> = FIX(%p.<f(FST(p)),g(SND(p))>)",propT));
+val tac = EVERY1[rtac lfp_is_FIX, simp_tac ss,
+	  strip_tac, simp_tac (LCF_ss addsimps [PROD_less]),
+	  rtac conjI, rtac least_FIX, etac subst, rtac (FST RS sym),
+	  rtac least_FIX, etac subst, rtac (SND RS sym)];
+in
+val Some(FIX_pair,_) = Sequence.pull(tapply(tac,thm));
+end;
+
+val FIX_pair_conj = SIMP_THM (LCF_ss addsimps [PROD_eq]) FIX_pair;
+*)
+val FIX_pair = prove_goal LCF.thy
+  "<FIX(f),FIX(g)> = FIX(%p.<f(FST(p)),g(SND(p))>)"
+  (fn _ => [rtac lfp_is_FIX 1, simp_tac ss 1,
+	  strip_tac 1, simp_tac (LCF_ss addsimps [PROD_less]) 1,
+	  rtac conjI 1, rtac least_FIX 1, etac subst 1, rtac (FST RS sym) 1,
+	  rtac least_FIX 1, etac subst 1, rtac (SND RS sym) 1]);
+
+val FIX_pair_conj = rewrite_rule (map mk_meta_eq [PROD_eq,FST,SND]) FIX_pair;
+
+val FIX1 = FIX_pair_conj RS conjunct1;
+val FIX2 = FIX_pair_conj RS conjunct2;
+
+val induct2 = prove_goal LCF.thy
+	 "[| adm(%p.P(FST(p),SND(p))); P(UU::'a,UU::'b);\
+\	     ALL x y. P(x,y) --> P(f(x),g(y)) |] ==> P(FIX(f),FIX(g))"
+	(fn prems => [EVERY1
+	[res_inst_tac [("f","f"),("g","g")] (standard(FIX1 RS ssubst)),
+	 res_inst_tac [("f","f"),("g","g")] (standard(FIX2 RS ssubst)),
+	 res_inst_tac [("f","%x. <f(FST(x)),g(SND(x))>")] induct,
+	 rstac prems, simp_tac ss, rstac prems,
+	 simp_tac (LCF_ss addsimps [expand_all_PROD]), rstac prems]]);
+
+fun induct2_tac (f,g) i = res_inst_tac[("f",f),("g",g)] induct2 i THEN
+		     REPEAT(rstac adm_lemmas i);
+
+end;
+
+open Fix;