proper use of bind_thm(s);

--- a/src/FOL/simpdata.ML	Sat Nov 03 18:42:00 2001 +0100
+++ b/src/FOL/simpdata.ML	Sat Nov 03 18:42:38 2001 +0100
@@ -9,11 +9,11 @@
 
 (* Elimination of True from asumptions: *)
 
-val True_implies_equals = prove_goal IFOL.thy
+bind_thm ("True_implies_equals", prove_goal IFOL.thy
  "(True ==> PROP P) == PROP P"
 (K [rtac equal_intr_rule 1, atac 2,
           METAHYPS (fn prems => resolve_tac prems 1) 1,
-          rtac TrueI 1]);
+          rtac TrueI 1]));
 
 
 (*** Rewrite rules ***)
@@ -24,57 +24,57 @@
    (fn prems => [ (cut_facts_tac prems 1),
                   (IntPr.fast_tac 1) ]));
 
-val conj_simps = map int_prove_fun
+bind_thms ("conj_simps", map int_prove_fun
  ["P & True <-> P",      "True & P <-> P",
   "P & False <-> False", "False & P <-> False",
   "P & P <-> P", "P & P & Q <-> P & Q",
   "P & ~P <-> False",    "~P & P <-> False",
-  "(P & Q) & R <-> P & (Q & R)"];
+  "(P & Q) & R <-> P & (Q & R)"]);
 
-val disj_simps = map int_prove_fun
+bind_thms ("disj_simps", map int_prove_fun
  ["P | True <-> True",  "True | P <-> True",
   "P | False <-> P",    "False | P <-> P",
   "P | P <-> P", "P | P | Q <-> P | Q",
-  "(P | Q) | R <-> P | (Q | R)"];
+  "(P | Q) | R <-> P | (Q | R)"]);
 
-val not_simps = map int_prove_fun
+bind_thms ("not_simps", map int_prove_fun
  ["~(P|Q)  <-> ~P & ~Q",
-  "~ False <-> True",   "~ True <-> False"];
+  "~ False <-> True",   "~ True <-> False"]);
 
-val imp_simps = map int_prove_fun
+bind_thms ("imp_simps", map int_prove_fun
  ["(P --> False) <-> ~P",       "(P --> True) <-> True",
   "(False --> P) <-> True",     "(True --> P) <-> P",
-  "(P --> P) <-> True",         "(P --> ~P) <-> ~P"];
+  "(P --> P) <-> True",         "(P --> ~P) <-> ~P"]);
 
-val iff_simps = map int_prove_fun
+bind_thms ("iff_simps", map int_prove_fun
  ["(True <-> P) <-> P",         "(P <-> True) <-> P",
   "(P <-> P) <-> True",
-  "(False <-> P) <-> ~P",       "(P <-> False) <-> ~P"];
+  "(False <-> P) <-> ~P",       "(P <-> False) <-> ~P"]);
 
 (*The x=t versions are needed for the simplification procedures*)
-val quant_simps = map int_prove_fun
+bind_thms ("quant_simps", map int_prove_fun
  ["(ALL x. P) <-> P",
   "(ALL x. x=t --> P(x)) <-> P(t)",
   "(ALL x. t=x --> P(x)) <-> P(t)",
   "(EX x. P) <-> P",
   "(EX x. x=t & P(x)) <-> P(t)",
-  "(EX x. t=x & P(x)) <-> P(t)"];
+  "(EX x. t=x & P(x)) <-> P(t)"]);
 
 (*These are NOT supplied by default!*)
-val distrib_simps  = map int_prove_fun
+bind_thms ("distrib_simps", map int_prove_fun
  ["P & (Q | R) <-> P&Q | P&R",
   "(Q | R) & P <-> Q&P | R&P",
-  "(P | Q --> R) <-> (P --> R) & (Q --> R)"];
+  "(P | Q --> R) <-> (P --> R) & (Q --> R)"]);
 
 (** Conversion into rewrite rules **)
 
 fun gen_all th = forall_elim_vars (#maxidx(rep_thm th)+1) th;
 
-val P_iff_F = int_prove_fun "~P ==> (P <-> False)";
-val iff_reflection_F = P_iff_F RS iff_reflection;
+bind_thm ("P_iff_F", int_prove_fun "~P ==> (P <-> False)");
+bind_thm ("iff_reflection_F", P_iff_F RS iff_reflection);
 
-val P_iff_T = int_prove_fun "P ==> (P <-> True)";
-val iff_reflection_T = P_iff_T RS iff_reflection;
+bind_thm ("P_iff_T", int_prove_fun "P ==> (P <-> True)");
+bind_thm ("iff_reflection_T", P_iff_T RS iff_reflection);
 
 (*Make meta-equalities.  The operator below is Trueprop*)
 
@@ -135,7 +135,7 @@
 
 (*Avoids duplication of subgoals after expand_if, when the true and false
   cases boil down to the same thing.*)
-val cases_simp = prove_fun "(P --> Q) & (~P --> Q) <-> Q";
+bind_thm ("cases_simp", prove_fun "(P --> Q) & (~P --> Q) <-> Q");
 
 
 (*** Miniscoping: pushing quantifiers in
@@ -145,32 +145,32 @@
 ***)
 
 (*existential miniscoping*)
-val int_ex_simps = map int_prove_fun
-                     ["(EX x. P(x) & Q) <-> (EX x. P(x)) & Q",
-                      "(EX x. P & Q(x)) <-> P & (EX x. Q(x))",
-                      "(EX x. P(x) | Q) <-> (EX x. P(x)) | Q",
-                      "(EX x. P | Q(x)) <-> P | (EX x. Q(x))"];
+bind_thms ("int_ex_simps", map int_prove_fun
+ ["(EX x. P(x) & Q) <-> (EX x. P(x)) & Q",
+  "(EX x. P & Q(x)) <-> P & (EX x. Q(x))",
+  "(EX x. P(x) | Q) <-> (EX x. P(x)) | Q",
+  "(EX x. P | Q(x)) <-> P | (EX x. Q(x))"]);
 
 (*classical rules*)
-val cla_ex_simps = map prove_fun
-                     ["(EX x. P(x) --> Q) <-> (ALL x. P(x)) --> Q",
-                      "(EX x. P --> Q(x)) <-> P --> (EX x. Q(x))"];
+bind_thms ("cla_ex_simps", map prove_fun
+ ["(EX x. P(x) --> Q) <-> (ALL x. P(x)) --> Q",
+  "(EX x. P --> Q(x)) <-> P --> (EX x. Q(x))"]);
 
-val ex_simps = int_ex_simps @ cla_ex_simps;
+bind_thms ("ex_simps", int_ex_simps @ cla_ex_simps);
 
 (*universal miniscoping*)
-val int_all_simps = map int_prove_fun
-                      ["(ALL x. P(x) & Q) <-> (ALL x. P(x)) & Q",
-                       "(ALL x. P & Q(x)) <-> P & (ALL x. Q(x))",
-                       "(ALL x. P(x) --> Q) <-> (EX x. P(x)) --> Q",
-                       "(ALL x. P --> Q(x)) <-> P --> (ALL x. Q(x))"];
+bind_thms ("int_all_simps", map int_prove_fun
+ ["(ALL x. P(x) & Q) <-> (ALL x. P(x)) & Q",
+  "(ALL x. P & Q(x)) <-> P & (ALL x. Q(x))",
+  "(ALL x. P(x) --> Q) <-> (EX x. P(x)) --> Q",
+  "(ALL x. P --> Q(x)) <-> P --> (ALL x. Q(x))"]);
 
 (*classical rules*)
-val cla_all_simps = map prove_fun
-                      ["(ALL x. P(x) | Q) <-> (ALL x. P(x)) | Q",
-                       "(ALL x. P | Q(x)) <-> P | (ALL x. Q(x))"];
+bind_thms ("cla_all_simps", map prove_fun
+ ["(ALL x. P(x) | Q) <-> (ALL x. P(x)) | Q",
+  "(ALL x. P | Q(x)) <-> P | (ALL x. Q(x))"]);
 
-val all_simps = int_all_simps @ cla_all_simps;
+bind_thms ("all_simps", int_all_simps @ cla_all_simps);
 
 
 (*** Named rewrite rules proved for IFOL ***)
@@ -183,11 +183,11 @@
 
 int_prove "conj_commute" "P&Q <-> Q&P";
 int_prove "conj_left_commute" "P&(Q&R) <-> Q&(P&R)";
-val conj_comms = [conj_commute, conj_left_commute];
+bind_thms ("conj_comms", [conj_commute, conj_left_commute]);
 
 int_prove "disj_commute" "P|Q <-> Q|P";
 int_prove "disj_left_commute" "P|(Q|R) <-> Q|(P|R)";
-val disj_comms = [disj_commute, disj_left_commute];
+bind_thms ("disj_comms", [disj_commute, disj_left_commute]);
 
 int_prove "conj_disj_distribL" "P&(Q|R) <-> (P&Q | P&R)";
 int_prove "conj_disj_distribR" "(P|Q)&R <-> (P&R | Q&R)";
@@ -272,8 +272,8 @@
 
 (*** Case splitting ***)
 
-val meta_eq_to_iff = prove_goal IFOL.thy "x==y ==> x<->y"
-  (fn [prem] => [rewtac prem, rtac iffI 1, atac 1, atac 1]);
+bind_thm ("meta_eq_to_iff", prove_goal IFOL.thy "x==y ==> x<->y"
+  (fn [prem] => [rewtac prem, rtac iffI 1, atac 1, atac 1]));
 
 structure SplitterData =
   struct
@@ -307,16 +307,16 @@
 open Induction;
 
 
-val meta_simps =
-   [triv_forall_equality,  (* prunes params *)
-    True_implies_equals];  (* prune asms `True' *)
+bind_thms ("meta_simps",
+ [triv_forall_equality,   (* prunes params *)
+  True_implies_equals]);  (* prune asms `True' *)
 
-val IFOL_simps =
-    [refl RS P_iff_T] @ conj_simps @ disj_simps @ not_simps @
-    imp_simps @ iff_simps @ quant_simps;
+bind_thms ("IFOL_simps",
+ [refl RS P_iff_T] @ conj_simps @ disj_simps @ not_simps @
+  imp_simps @ iff_simps @ quant_simps);
 
-val notFalseI = int_prove_fun "~False";
-val triv_rls = [TrueI,refl,reflexive_thm,iff_refl,notFalseI];
+bind_thm ("notFalseI", int_prove_fun "~False");
+bind_thms ("triv_rls", [TrueI,refl,reflexive_thm,iff_refl,notFalseI]);
 
 fun unsafe_solver prems = FIRST'[resolve_tac (triv_rls@prems),
                                  atac, etac FalseE];
@@ -339,14 +339,14 @@
   addsimprocs [defALL_regroup, defEX_regroup]    
   addcongs [imp_cong];
 
-val cla_simps =
-    [de_Morgan_conj, de_Morgan_disj, imp_disj1, imp_disj2,
-     not_all, not_ex, cases_simp] @
-    map prove_fun
-     ["~(P&Q)  <-> ~P | ~Q",
-      "P | ~P",             "~P | P",
-      "~ ~ P <-> P",        "(~P --> P) <-> P",
-      "(~P <-> ~Q) <-> (P<->Q)"];
+bind_thms ("cla_simps",
+  [de_Morgan_conj, de_Morgan_disj, imp_disj1, imp_disj2,
+   not_all, not_ex, cases_simp] @
+  map prove_fun
+   ["~(P&Q) <-> ~P | ~Q",
+    "P | ~P",             "~P | P",
+    "~ ~ P <-> P",        "(~P --> P) <-> P",
+    "(~P <-> ~Q) <-> (P<->Q)"]);
 
 (*classical simprules too*)
 val FOL_ss = IFOL_ss addsimps (cla_simps @ cla_ex_simps @ cla_all_simps);

--- a/src/HOL/simpdata.ML	Sat Nov 03 18:42:00 2001 +0100
+++ b/src/HOL/simpdata.ML	Sat Nov 03 18:42:38 2001 +0100
@@ -17,19 +17,16 @@
 br refl 1;
 qed "eta_contract_eq";
 
-local
 
-  fun prover s = prove_goal (the_context ()) s (fn _ => [(Blast_tac 1)]);
-
-in
+fun prover s = prove_goal (the_context ()) s (fn _ => [(Blast_tac 1)]);
 
 (*Make meta-equalities.  The operator below is Trueprop*)
 
 fun mk_meta_eq r = r RS eq_reflection;
 fun safe_mk_meta_eq r = mk_meta_eq r handle Thm.THM _ => r;
 
-val Eq_TrueI  = mk_meta_eq(prover  "P --> (P = True)"  RS mp);
-val Eq_FalseI = mk_meta_eq(prover "~P --> (P = False)" RS mp);
+bind_thm ("Eq_TrueI", mk_meta_eq (prover  "P --> (P = True)"  RS mp));
+bind_thm ("Eq_FalseI", mk_meta_eq(prover "~P --> (P = False)" RS mp));
 
 fun mk_eq th = case concl_of th of
         Const("==",_)$_$_       => th
@@ -47,63 +44,56 @@
   handle THM _ =>
   error("Premises and conclusion of congruence rules must be =-equalities");
 
-val not_not = prover "(~ ~ P) = P";
+bind_thm ("not_not", prover "(~ ~ P) = P");
 
-val simp_thms = [not_not] @ map prover
- [ "(x=x) = True",
-   "(~True) = False", "(~False) = True",
-   "(~P) ~= P", "P ~= (~P)", "(P ~= Q) = (P = (~Q))",
-   "(True=P) = P", "(P=True) = P", "(False=P) = (~P)", "(P=False) = (~P)",
-   "(True --> P) = P", "(False --> P) = True",
-   "(P --> True) = True", "(P --> P) = True",
-   "(P --> False) = (~P)", "(P --> ~P) = (~P)",
-   "(P & True) = P", "(True & P) = P",
-   "(P & False) = False", "(False & P) = False",
-   "(P & P) = P", "(P & (P & Q)) = (P & Q)",
-   "(P & ~P) = False",    "(~P & P) = False",
-   "(P | True) = True", "(True | P) = True",
-   "(P | False) = P", "(False | P) = P",
-   "(P | P) = P", "(P | (P | Q)) = (P | Q)",
-   "(P | ~P) = True",    "(~P | P) = True",
-   "((~P) = (~Q)) = (P=Q)",
-   "(!x. P) = P", "(? x. P) = P", "? x. x=t", "? x. t=x",
+bind_thms ("simp_thms", [not_not] @ map prover
+ ["(x=x) = True",
+  "(~True) = False", "(~False) = True",
+  "(~P) ~= P", "P ~= (~P)", "(P ~= Q) = (P = (~Q))",
+  "(True=P) = P", "(P=True) = P", "(False=P) = (~P)", "(P=False) = (~P)",
+  "(True --> P) = P", "(False --> P) = True",
+  "(P --> True) = True", "(P --> P) = True",
+  "(P --> False) = (~P)", "(P --> ~P) = (~P)",
+  "(P & True) = P", "(True & P) = P",
+  "(P & False) = False", "(False & P) = False",
+  "(P & P) = P", "(P & (P & Q)) = (P & Q)",
+  "(P & ~P) = False",    "(~P & P) = False",
+  "(P | True) = True", "(True | P) = True",
+  "(P | False) = P", "(False | P) = P",
+  "(P | P) = P", "(P | (P | Q)) = (P | Q)",
+  "(P | ~P) = True",    "(~P | P) = True",
+  "((~P) = (~Q)) = (P=Q)",
+  "(!x. P) = P", "(? x. P) = P", "? x. x=t", "? x. t=x",
 (* needed for the one-point-rule quantifier simplification procs*)
 (*essential for termination!!*)
-   "(? x. x=t & P(x)) = P(t)",
-   "(? x. t=x & P(x)) = P(t)",
-   "(! x. x=t --> P(x)) = P(t)",
-   "(! x. t=x --> P(x)) = P(t)" ];
+  "(? x. x=t & P(x)) = P(t)",
+  "(? x. t=x & P(x)) = P(t)",
+  "(! x. x=t --> P(x)) = P(t)",
+  "(! x. t=x --> P(x)) = P(t)"]);
 
-val imp_cong = standard(impI RSN
+bind_thm ("imp_cong", standard (impI RSN
     (2, prove_goal (the_context ()) "(P=P')--> (P'--> (Q=Q'))--> ((P-->Q) = (P'-->Q'))"
-        (fn _=> [(Blast_tac 1)]) RS mp RS mp));
+        (fn _=> [(Blast_tac 1)]) RS mp RS mp)));
 
 (*Miniscoping: pushing in existential quantifiers*)
-val ex_simps = map prover
-                ["(EX x. P x & Q)   = ((EX x. P x) & Q)",
-                 "(EX x. P & Q x)   = (P & (EX x. Q x))",
-                 "(EX x. P x | Q)   = ((EX x. P x) | Q)",
-                 "(EX x. P | Q x)   = (P | (EX x. Q x))",
-                 "(EX x. P x --> Q) = ((ALL x. P x) --> Q)",
-                 "(EX x. P --> Q x) = (P --> (EX x. Q x))"];
+bind_thms ("ex_simps", map prover
+ ["(EX x. P x & Q)   = ((EX x. P x) & Q)",
+  "(EX x. P & Q x)   = (P & (EX x. Q x))",
+  "(EX x. P x | Q)   = ((EX x. P x) | Q)",
+  "(EX x. P | Q x)   = (P | (EX x. Q x))",
+  "(EX x. P x --> Q) = ((ALL x. P x) --> Q)",
+  "(EX x. P --> Q x) = (P --> (EX x. Q x))"]);
 
 (*Miniscoping: pushing in universal quantifiers*)
-val all_simps = map prover
-                ["(ALL x. P x & Q)   = ((ALL x. P x) & Q)",
-                 "(ALL x. P & Q x)   = (P & (ALL x. Q x))",
-                 "(ALL x. P x | Q)   = ((ALL x. P x) | Q)",
-                 "(ALL x. P | Q x)   = (P | (ALL x. Q x))",
-                 "(ALL x. P x --> Q) = ((EX x. P x) --> Q)",
-                 "(ALL x. P --> Q x) = (P --> (ALL x. Q x))"];
+bind_thms ("all_simps", map prover
+ ["(ALL x. P x & Q)   = ((ALL x. P x) & Q)",
+  "(ALL x. P & Q x)   = (P & (ALL x. Q x))",
+  "(ALL x. P x | Q)   = ((ALL x. P x) | Q)",
+  "(ALL x. P | Q x)   = (P | (ALL x. Q x))",
+  "(ALL x. P x --> Q) = ((EX x. P x) --> Q)",
+  "(ALL x. P --> Q x) = (P --> (ALL x. Q x))"]);
 
 
-end;
-
-bind_thms ("ex_simps", ex_simps);
-bind_thms ("all_simps", all_simps);
-bind_thm ("not_not", not_not);
-bind_thm ("imp_cong", imp_cong);
-
 (* Elimination of True from asumptions: *)
 
 local fun rd s = read_cterm (sign_of (the_context())) (s, propT);
@@ -117,18 +107,18 @@
 prove "eq_commute" "(a=b) = (b=a)";
 prove "eq_left_commute" "(P=(Q=R)) = (Q=(P=R))";
 prove "eq_assoc" "((P=Q)=R) = (P=(Q=R))";
-val eq_ac = [eq_commute, eq_left_commute, eq_assoc];
+bind_thms ("eq_ac", [eq_commute, eq_left_commute, eq_assoc]);
 
 prove "neq_commute" "(a~=b) = (b~=a)";
 
 prove "conj_commute" "(P&Q) = (Q&P)";
 prove "conj_left_commute" "(P&(Q&R)) = (Q&(P&R))";
-val conj_comms = [conj_commute, conj_left_commute];
+bind_thms ("conj_comms", [conj_commute, conj_left_commute]);
 prove "conj_assoc" "((P&Q)&R) = (P&(Q&R))";
 
 prove "disj_commute" "(P|Q) = (Q|P)";
 prove "disj_left_commute" "(P|(Q|R)) = (Q|(P|R))";
-val disj_comms = [disj_commute, disj_left_commute];
+bind_thms ("disj_comms", [disj_commute, disj_left_commute]);
 prove "disj_assoc" "((P|Q)|R) = (P|(Q|R))";
 
 prove "conj_disj_distribL" "(P&(Q|R)) = (P&Q | P&R)";