2

I've been trying out coinductive types and decided to define coinductive versions of the natural numbers and the vectors (lists with their size in the type). I defined them and the infinite number as so:

CoInductive conat : Set :=
| cozero : conat
| cosuc : conat -> conat.

CoInductive covec (A : Set) : conat -> Set :=
| conil : covec A cozero
| cocons : forall (n : conat), A -> covec A n -> covec A (cosuc n).           

CoFixpoint infnum : conat := cosuc infnum.

It all worked except for the definition I gave for an infinite covector

CoFixpoint ones : covec nat infnum := cocons 1 ones.

which gave the following type mismatch

Error:
In environment
ones : covec nat infnum
The term "cocons 1 ones" has type "covec nat (cosuc infnum)" while it is expected to have type
 "covec nat infnum".

I thought the compiler would accept this definition since, by definition, infnum = cosuc infnum. How can I make the compiler understand these expressions are the same?

1 Answers1

1

The standard way to solve this issue is described in Adam Chlipala's CPDT (see the chapter on Coinduction).

Definition frob (c : conat) :=
  match c with
  | cozero => cozero
  | cosuc c' => cosuc c'
  end.

Lemma frob_eq (c : conat) : c = frob c.
Proof. now destruct c. Qed.

You can use the above definitions like so:

CoFixpoint ones : covec nat infnum.
Proof. rewrite frob_eq; exact (cocons 1 ones). Defined.

or, perhaps, in a bit more readable way:

Require Import Coq.Program.Tactics.

Program CoFixpoint ones : covec nat infnum := cocons 1 ones.
Next Obligation. now rewrite frob_eq. Qed.
Anton Trunov
  • 15,074
  • 2
  • 23
  • 43