Hi folds, I want to do something like this replace (m + n) with (n + m) by (rewrite add_comm)
, but this is not valid syntax. I would like to keep replace solution closer to the replace call
Daniel Hilst Selli has marked this topic as resolved.
Daniel Hilst Selli has marked this topic as unresolved.
replace (m+n) with (n+m) by (rewrite add_comm; auto)
works.
But not sure if I understood the question correctly.
Yeah, whatever you put after by
needs to actually solve the goal.
replace (n + m) with (m + n) by now rewrite add_comm.
works as well (no need for the parentheses if there are no semicolons)
Ohh I tried with .
instead of ;
, thank you Lessness, and thank you Ana!
Daniel Hilst Selli has marked this topic as resolved.
Not needing parentheses make it look nicer
Last updated: Oct 04 2023 at 19:01 UTC