Major Section: EVENTS

Example: (defevaluator evl evl-list ((length x) (member x y)))See meta.

General Form: (defevaluator ev ev-list ((g1 x1 ... xn_1) ... (gk x1 ... xn_k))where

`ev`

and `ev`

-list are new function symbols and `g1`

, ..., `gk`

are
old function symbols with the indicated number of formals, i.e.,
each `gi`

has `n_i`

formals.
This function provides a convenient way to constrain `ev`

and `ev-list`

to be mutually-recursive evaluator functions for the symbols `g1`

,
..., `gk`

. Roughly speaking, an evaluator function for a fixed,
finite set of function symbols is a restriction of the universal
evaluator to terms composed of variables, constants, lambda
expressions, and applications of the given functions. However,
evaluator functions are constrained rather than defined, so that the
proof that a given metafunction is correct vis-a-vis a particular
evaluator function can be lifted (by functional instantiation) to a
proof that it is correct for any larger evaluator function.
See meta for a discussion of metafunctions.

`Defevaluator`

executes an `encapsulate`

after generating the
appropriate `defun`

and `defthm`

events. Perhaps the easiest way to
understand what `defevaluator`

does is to execute the keyword command

:trans1 (defevaluator evl evl-list ((length x) (member x y)))and inspect the output. This trick is also useful in the rare case that the event fails because a hint is needed. In that case, the output of

`:`

`trans1`

can be edited by adding hints, then
submitted directly.
Formally, `ev`

is said to be an ``evaluator function for `g1`

,
..., `gk`

, with mutually-recursive counterpart `ev-list`

'' iff
`ev`

and `ev-list`

are constrained functions satisfying just the
constraints discussed below.

`Ev`

and `ev-list`

must satisfy constraints (1)-(4) and (k):

(1) How to ev a variable symbol: (implies (symbolp x) (equal (ev x a) (cdr (assoc-eq x a))))(2) How to ev a constant: (implies (and (consp x) (equal (car x) 'quote)) (equal (ev x a) (cadr x)))

(3) How to ev a lambda application: (implies (and (consp x) (consp (car x))) (equal (ev x a) (ev (caddar x) (pairlis$ (cadar x) (ev-list (cdr x) a)))))

(4) How to ev an argument list: (implies (consp x-lst) (equal (ev-list x-lst a) (cons (ev (car x-lst) a) (ev-list (cdr x-lst) a)))) (implies (not (consp x-lst)) (equal (ev-list x-lst a) nil))

(k) For each i from 1 to k, how to ev an application of gi, where gi is a function symbol of n arguments: (implies (and (consp x) (equal (car x) 'gi)) (equal (ev x a) (gi (ev x1 a) ... (ev xn a)))), where xi is the (cad...dr x) expression equivalent to (nth i x).

`Defevaluator`

defines suitable witnesses for `ev`

and `ev-list`

, proves
the theorems about them, and constrains `ev`

and `ev-list`

appropriately. We expect `defevaluator`

to work without assistance
from you, though the proofs do take some time and generate a lot of
output. The proofs are done in the context of a fixed theory,
namely the value of the constant `*defevaluator-form-base-theory*`

.
(Aside: (3) above may seem surprising, since the bindings of `a`

are not
included in the environment that is used to evaluate the lambda body,
`(caddar x)`

. However, ACL2 lambda expressions are all *closed*:
in `(lambda (v1 ... vn) body)`

, the only free variables in `body`

are
among the `vi`

. See term.)