Coq: cannot unify inductive types

Question

I am trying to represent multi-dimensional arrays as restricted functions, and I am having a trouble with defining what seem to be a primitive function.

Here are the definitions:

Require Export Fin.
Require Export PeanoNat.

Inductive ispace : nat -> Type :=
  Rect: forall d:nat, ((Fin.t d) -> nat) -> ispace d.

Inductive index : nat -> Type :=
  Idx: forall d: nat, (Fin.t d -> nat) -> index d.

Inductive bound_idx : forall d, index d -> ispace d -> Prop -> Type :=
  RectBoundIdx : forall d f_idx f_shp,
                 bound_idx d (Idx d f_idx) 
                             (Rect d f_shp)
                             (forall i, f_idx i < f_shp i).
Inductive array : 
  forall d (is:ispace d), 
           (forall idx pf, bound_idx d idx is pf -> nat) -> Type :=
  RectArray: forall (d:nat) sh_f val_f, 
             array d (Rect d sh_f) val_f.

I define type families for rectangular index-spaces, for indices and for an index that is bounded by a rectangular index-space. The array type is a function from a restricted index-space to nat.

Now, I am trying to construct an array from such a function:

Definition func_to_arr d is (af:forall idx pf,
                             bound_idx d idx is pf -> nat) :=
  match is with
  | Rect d f => RectArray d f af
  end.

And Coq tells me:

Error:
In environment
d : nat
is : ispace d
af : forall (idx : index d) (pf : Prop), bound_idx d idx is pf -> nat
d0 : nat
f : t d0 -> nat
The term "af" has type "forall (idx : index d) (pf : Prop), bound_idx d idx is pf -> nat"
while it is expected to have type "forall (idx : index d0) (pf : Prop), bound_idx d0 idx (Rect d0 f) pf -> nat"
(cannot unify "index d0" and "index d").

So I am wondering, how can I pass this information to the above definition, so that it becomes valid. Unless I misunderstand something, the type of af contains all the necessary information to reconstruct an array.

score 0 · Answer 1 · answered Jun 16 '18 at 16:15

This issue is very common in dependently-typed programming with Coq. To solve it, people usually use the convoy pattern described in CPDT by A. Chlipala (MoreDep chapter, IIRC) and mentioned multiple time on Stackoverflow.

Here is how you can define the function.

Definition func_to_arr d is (af:forall idx pf, bound_idx d idx is pf -> nat) :=
  match is
  as is'
  in (ispace d1)
  return
    forall af' : forall idx pf, bound_idx d1 idx is' pf -> nat, array d1 is' af'
  with
  | Rect d2 f => fun af' => RectArray d2 f af'
  end af.

I'm doing dependent pattern-matching here, basically performing "rewrites" of indices so Coq can see the connections between variables that a human reader ususally takes for granted. You can read about the constructions I used here in extended pattern matching section of the manual.

Incidentally, if you made d a parameter of your inductive types instead of making it an index, you would not need to mess with d1, d2 and the in (ispace d1) would not be necessary. If the choice was accidental, then you might want to take a look at the answer explaining the difference between those.

Coq: cannot unify inductive types

1 Answers1