update documentation for the recent syntax changes

CHANGES

 * marks an incompatible change
 
+  o WhyML with mutable record fields and type models
+  o why3replayer
 
-  o new syntax for logical connections
-      conjunction and     /\
-      disjunction or      \/
-      negation    not     ~
-      implication implies ->
-      equivalence iff     <->
+  * "logic" is not a keyword anymore, use "function" and "predicate"
+  * new syntax for conjunction (/\) and disjunction (\/)
+  * functions to create an environment are now exported from Env
   o fixed Alt-ergo output: no triggers for "exists" quantifier
   o [IDE] tool "Replay" works
   o [IDE] does not use Threads anymore, thanks to Call_provers.query_call
   o VC gen produces explanations in a suitable form for IDE
   o [IDE] displays explanations using labels of the form "expl:..."
   o fixed Coq output for polymorphic inductive predicates
+  o [IDE] dropped dependence on Sqlite
   * calls to prover can now be asynchronous 
     Driver.prove_task now returns some intermediate value (of type
     prover_call), which can be queried in two ways:
@@ -20,7 +20,7 @@
     - non-blocking way with Call_provers.query_call
     So old code performing "prove_task t () ()" should be translated to
     "wait_on_call (prove_task t ()) ()".
-  o record types in the logic
+  o record types
     - introduced with syntax "type t = {| a:int; b:bool |}"
       actually syntactic sugar for "type t = `mk t' (a:int) (b:bool)"
       i.e. an algebraic with one constructor and projection functions

doc/api.tex

@@ -51,7 +51,7 @@ ocamlc str.cma unix.cma nums.cma dynlink.cma \
 \end{verbatim}
 Running the generated executable \texttt{f} results in the following output.
 \begin{verbatim}
-formula 1 is: true or false
+formula 1 is: true \/ false
 \end{verbatim}
 
 Let's now build a formula with propositional variables: $A \land B
@@ -77,7 +77,7 @@ let () = printf "@[formula 2 is:@ %a@]@." Pretty.print_term fmla2
 
 As expected, the output is as follows.
 \begin{verbatim}
-formula 2 is: A and B -> A
+formula 2 is: A /\ B -> A
 \end{verbatim}
 Notice that the concrete syntax of \why\ forbids predicate identifiers
 to start with a capital letter. This constraint does not exist when
@@ -133,16 +133,16 @@ Execution of our OCaml program now outputs:
 \begin{verbatim}
 task 1 is:
 theory Task
-  goal Goal1 : true or false
+  goal Goal1 : true \/ false
 end
 
 task 2 is:
 theory Task
-  logic A
+  predicate A
 
-  logic B
+  predicate B
 
-  goal Goal2 : A and B -> A
+  goal Goal2 : A /\ B -> A
 end
 \end{verbatim}
 

doc/expr.bnf

@@ -36,7 +36,7 @@
   \
   expr-case ::= pattern "->" expr                 ;
   \
-  field-value ::= lqualid "=" expr                ;
+  field-value ::= lqualid "=" expr ";"            ;
   \
   triple ::= expr                                 ;
     | pre expr post                               ; Hoare triple
@@ -50,4 +50,4 @@
   loop-inv ::= "invariant" annotation
   \
   variant ::= "variant" "{" term "}" ("with" lqualid)?
-\end{syntax}
\ No newline at end of file
+\end{syntax}

doc/formula.bnf

@@ -2,9 +2,9 @@
   formula ::= "true" | "false" ;
        | formula "->"  formula ; implication
        | formula "<->" formula ; equivalence
-       | formula "and" formula ; conjunction
+       | formula "/\" formula ; conjunction
        | formula "&&"  formula ; asymmetric conjunction
-       | formula "or"  formula ; disjunction
+       | formula "\/"  formula ; disjunction
        | formula "||"  formula ; asymmetric disjunction
        | "not" formula         ; negation
        | lqualid 	       ; symbol

doc/library.tex

@@ -10,10 +10,10 @@ corresponding file, or alternatively, use the \verb|why3| with option
 > why3 -T bool.Ite
 theory Ite
   (* use BuiltIn *)
-  
+
   (* use Bool *)
-  
-  logic ite (b:bool) (x:'a) (y:'a) : 'a =
+
+  function ite (b:bool) (x:'a) (y:'a) : 'a =
     match b with
     | True -> x
     | False -> y
@@ -214,8 +214,8 @@ is inspired by~\cite{ayad10ijcar}.
 \section{Library \texttt{string}}
 
 \begin{description}
-\item[Char] 
-\item[String] 
+\item[Char]
+\item[String]
 \end{description}
 
 %%% Local Variables:

doc/manpages.tex

@@ -69,7 +69,7 @@ make install_lib
 \why\ can use a wide range of external theorem provers. These need to
 be installed separately, and then \why\ needs to be configured to use
 them. There is no need to install these provers before compiling and
-installing Why. 
+installing Why.
 
 For installation of external provers, please look at the Why provers
 tips page \url{http://why.lri.fr/provers.en.html}.
@@ -101,9 +101,9 @@ tracking system).
 
 The result of provers detection is stored in the user's
 configuration file (\verb+~/.why.conf+ or, in the case of local
-installation, \verb+why.conf+ in Why3 sources top directory). This file 
+installation, \verb+why.conf+ in Why3 sources top directory). This file
 is also human-readable, and advanced users may modify it in order to
-experiment with different ways of calling provers, \eg{} different 
+experiment with different ways of calling provers, \eg{} different
 versions of the same prover, or with different options.
 
 The provers which are typically looked for are
@@ -127,7 +127,7 @@ printer, as explained in the corresponding section.
 
 If the user's configuration file is already present,
 \texttt{why3config} will only reset unset variables to default value,
-but will not try to detect provers. 
+but will not try to detect provers.
 The option \texttt{--detect-provers} should be used to force
 \why\ to detect again the available
 provers and to replace them in the configuration file. The option
@@ -152,9 +152,9 @@ The \texttt{why3} tool executes the following steps:
 \item Parse and typecheck the given files using the correct parser in order
   to obtain a set of \why\ theories for each file. It uses
   the filename extension or the \texttt{--format} option to choose
-  among the available parsers. The \texttt{--list-format} option gives 
+  among the available parsers. The \texttt{--list-format} option gives
   the list of registered parsers.
-\item Extract the selected goals inside each of the selected theories 
+\item Extract the selected goals inside each of the selected theories
   into tasks. The goals and theories are selected using the options
   \texttt{-G/--goal} and \texttt{-T/--theory}. The option
   \texttt{-T/--theory} applies to the last file appearing on the
@@ -248,7 +248,7 @@ the actions of the various menus and buttons of the interface.
 
 \item[Replay] replay all obsolete proofs [NOT YET AVAILABLE]
 
-\item[Remove] Removes a proof attempt or a transformation. 
+\item[Remove] Removes a proof attempt or a transformation.
 
 \end{description}
 
@@ -286,7 +286,7 @@ The preferences window allows you customize
   pressed. This might be overidden for a specific prover (the only way
   to do that for the moment is to manually edit the config file)
 \item the time limit given to provers, in seconds
-\item the maximal number of simultaneous provers allowed to run in parallel. 
+\item the maximal number of simultaneous provers allowed to run in parallel.
 \end{itemize}
 
 \subsection{Structure of the database file}
@@ -497,7 +497,7 @@ definitions~\cite{paskevich09rr}
 
 \item[eliminate\_if\_fmla] replaces formulas of the form \texttt{if f1 then f2
   else f3} by an equivalent formula using implications and other
-  connectives. 
+  connectives.
 
 \item[eliminate\_if]
   Apply both transformations above.
@@ -544,7 +544,8 @@ definitions~\cite{paskevich09rr}
   removes definitions of the form
 
 \begin{verbatim}
-logic f x_1 .. x_n = (g e_1 .. e_k)
+function  f x_1 .. x_n = (g e_1 .. e_k)
+predicate p x_1 .. x_n = (q e_1 .. e_k)
 \end{verbatim}
 when each $e_i$ is either a ground term or one of the $x_j$, and
 each $x_1$ .. $x_n$ occur at most once in the $e_i$
@@ -565,14 +566,14 @@ each $x_1$ .. $x_n$ occur at most once in the $e_i$
 \item[simplify\_recursive\_definition] reduces mutually recursive
   definitions if they are not really mutually recursive, e.g.:
 \begin{verbatim}
-logic f : ... = .... g ...
+function f : ... = .... g ...
 
 with g : .. = e
 \end{verbatim}
 becomes
 \begin{verbatim}
-logic g : .. = e
-logic f : ... = .... g ...
+function g : .. = e
+function f : ... = .... g ...
 \end{verbatim}
 if f does not occur in e
 
@@ -586,13 +587,13 @@ or
   forall x, t=x -> P(x)
 \end{verbatim}
   when x does not occur in t
-  into 
+  into
 \begin{verbatim}
 P(t)
 \end{verbatim}
   More generally, it applies this simplification whenever x=t appear
   in a negative position.
-  
+
 \item[simplify\_trivial\_quantification\_in\_goal]
   same as above but applies only in the goal.
 

doc/starting.tex

@@ -6,7 +6,7 @@
 The first and basic step in using \why\ is to write a suitable input
 file. When one wants to learn a programming language, you start by
 writing a basic program. Here we start by writing a file containing a
-basic set of goals. 
+basic set of goals.
 
 Here is our first \why\ file, which is the file
 \texttt{examples/hello\_proof.why} of the distribution.
@@ -24,7 +24,7 @@ We don't give more details here about the syntax and refer to
 Chapter~\ref{chap:syntax} for detailed explanations. In the following,
 we show how this file is handled in the \why\ GUI
 (Section~\ref{sec:gui}) then in batch mode using the \texttt{why3}
-executable (Section~\ref{sec:batch}). 
+executable (Section~\ref{sec:batch}).
 
 
 \section{Getting Started with the GUI}
@@ -73,7 +73,7 @@ file is shown on the bottom right part.
 Notice also that three provers were detected, and are now shown
 in the ``provers'' section of the left toolbar. In this example,
 detected provers are Alt-Ergo~\cite{ergo}, Coq~\cite{CoqArt} and
-Simplify~\cite{simplify05}. 
+Simplify~\cite{simplify05}.
 
 \subsection{Calling provers on goals}
 
@@ -99,7 +99,7 @@ are not proved, they are marked with an orange question mark.
 
 You can immediately attempt to prove the remaining goals using another
 prover, {\eg} Alt-Ergo, by clicking on the corresponding button. The
-goal $G_3$ should be proved now, but not $G_2$. 
+goal $G_3$ should be proved now, but not $G_2$.
 
 \subsection{Applying transformations}
 
@@ -130,7 +130,7 @@ Please take care of the comments of this file. Only the part between
 the two last comments can be modified. Moreover, these comments
 themselves should not be modified at all, they are used to mark the
 part you modify, in order to regenerate the file if the goal is
-changed. 
+changed.
 
 \begin{figure}[tbp]
   \includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{coqide.png}
@@ -147,7 +147,7 @@ explained below.
 Currently, the GUI does not allow to modify the input file. You must
 exit the GUI and modify the file by some editor of your choice. Let's assume we change the goal $G_2$ by replacing the first occurrence of true by false, \eg
 \begin{verbatim}
-  goal G2 : (false -> false) and (true or false)
+  goal G2 : (false -> false) /\ (true \/ false)
 \end{verbatim}
 Starting the IDE on the modified file and expanding everything with
 \textsf{Ctrl-E}, we get the tree view shown on Figure~\ref{fig:gui5}.
@@ -194,7 +194,7 @@ Known provers:
 \end{verbatim}
 The first word of each line is a unique identifier for the associated prover. We thus
 have now the three provers Alt-Ergo~\cite{ergo}, Coq~\cite{CoqArt} and
-Simplify~\cite{simplify05}. 
+Simplify~\cite{simplify05}.
 
 Let's assume now we want to run Simplify on the HelloProof
 example. The command to type and its output are as follows, where the

doc/syntax.tex

@@ -8,7 +8,7 @@ A \why\ text contains a list of \emph{theories}.
 A theory is a list of \emph{declarations}. Declarations introduce new
 types, functions and predicates, state axioms, lemmas and goals.
 These declarations can be directly written in the theory or taken from
-existing theories. The base logic of \why\ is a first-order
+existing theories. The base logic of \why\ is first-order
 logic with polymorphic types.
 
 \subsection{Example 1: lists}
@@ -35,7 +35,7 @@ theory Length
   use import List
   use import int.Int
 
-  logic length (l : list 'a) : int =
+  function length (l : list 'a) : int =
     match l with
     | Nil      -> 0
     | Cons _ r -> 1 + length r
@@ -77,8 +77,9 @@ either appear earlier in the current file, \eg\ \texttt{List}, or are
 predefined.
 
 The next declaration defines a recursive function, \texttt{length},
-which computes the length of a list. The \texttt{logic} keyword is
-used to introduce or define both function and predicate symbols.
+which computes the length of a list. The \texttt{function} and
+\texttt{predicate} keywords are used to introduce function and
+predicate symbols, respectively.
 \why\ checks every recursive, or mutually recursive, definition for
 termination. Basically, we require a lexicographic and structural
 descent for every recursive call for some reordering of arguments.
@@ -122,7 +123,7 @@ abstract (\emph{i.e.}~declared but not defined) symbols.
 \begin{verbatim}
 theory Order
   type t
-  logic (<=) t t
+  predicate (<=) t t
 
   axiom Le_refl : forall x : t. x <= x
   axiom Le_asym : forall x y : t. x <= y -> y <= x -> x = y
@@ -145,7 +146,7 @@ end
 
 theory SortedIntList
   use import int.Int
-  clone SortedGen with type O.t = int, logic O.(<=) = (<=)
+  clone SortedGen with type O.t = int, predicate O.(<=) = (<=)
 end
 \end{verbatim}
 \caption{Example of Why3 text (continued).}
@@ -238,7 +239,7 @@ theory SortedIntList
   axiom Le_trans : forall x:int, y:int, z:int. x <= y -> y <= z
     -> x <= z
 
-  (* clone Order with type t = int, logic (<=) = (<=),
+  (* clone Order with type t = int, predicate (<=) = (<=),
     prop Le_trans1 = Le_trans, prop Le_asym1 = Le_asym,
     prop Le_refl1 = Le_refl *)
 
@@ -248,8 +249,8 @@ theory SortedIntList
     | Sorted_Two : forall x:int, y:int, l:list int. x <= y ->
         sorted (Cons y l) -> sorted (Cons x (Cons y l))
 
-  (* clone SortedGen with type t1 = int, logic sorted1 = sorted,
-    logic (<=) = (<=), prop Sorted_Two1 = Sorted_Two,
+  (* clone SortedGen with type t1 = int, predicate sorted1 = sorted,
+    predicate (<=) = (<=), prop Sorted_Two1 = Sorted_Two,
     prop Sorted_One1 = Sorted_One, prop Sorted_Nil1 = Sorted_Nil,
     prop Le_trans2 = Le_trans, prop Le_asym2 = Le_asym,
     prop Le_refl2 = Le_refl *)
@@ -347,8 +348,8 @@ theory Bijection
   type t
   type u
 
-  logic of t : u
-  logic to u : t
+  function of t : u
+  function to u : t
 
   axiom To_of : forall x : t. to (of x) = x
   axiom Of_to : forall y : u. of (to y) = y
@@ -392,7 +393,7 @@ and that drinks, cigars and pets are all associated bijectively to persons:
 Next we need a way to state that a person lives next to another. We
 first define a predicate \texttt{leftof} over two houses.
 \begin{verbatim}
-  logic leftof (h1 h2 : house) =
+  predicate leftof (h1 h2 : house) =
     match h1, h2 with
     | H1, H2
     | H2, H3
@@ -406,10 +407,10 @@ for the four positive cases and a universal pattern for the remaining
 21 cases. It is then immediate to define a \texttt{neighbour}
 predicate over two houses, which completes theory \texttt{Einstein}.
 \begin{verbatim}
-  logic rightof (h1 h2 : house) =
+  predicate rightof (h1 h2 : house) =
     leftof h2 h1
-  logic neighbour (h1 h2 : house) =
-    leftof h1 h2 or rightof h1 h2
+  predicate neighbour (h1 h2 : house) =
+    leftof h1 h2 \/ rightof h1 h2
 end
 \end{verbatim}
 

doc/syntaxref.tex

@@ -105,8 +105,8 @@ associativities, from lowest to greatest priority:
     \texttt{if then else} / \texttt{let in} & -- \\
     label & -- \\
     \texttt{->} / \texttt{<->} & right \\
-    \texttt{or} / \verb!||! & right \\
-    \texttt{and} / \verb!&&! & right \\
+    \verb!\/! / \verb!||! & right \\
+    \verb|/\| / \verb!&&! & right \\
     \texttt{not}  & -- \\
     infix level 1 & left \\
     infix level 2 & left \\

doc/term.bnf

@@ -6,7 +6,7 @@
        | bang-op term 	  ;
        | term infix-op term 	  ;
        | term "[" term "]"	  ; brackets
-       | term "[" term infix-op-1 term "]" 	  ; ternary brackets
+       | term "[" term "<-" term "]" 	  ; ternary brackets
        | lqualid term+ 		  ; function application
        | "if" formula "then" term ;
          "else" term              ; conditional
@@ -15,7 +15,7 @@
        | "match" term ("," term)* "with" ;
          ("|" term-case)+ "end"          ; pattern matching
        | "(" term ("," term)+ ")" ; tuple
-       | "{|" field-value+ "|}"   ; record 
+       | "{|" field-value+ "|}"   ; record
        | term "." lqualid         ; field access
        | "{|" term "with" field-value+ "|}"    ; field update
        | term ":" type 	          ; cast
@@ -32,5 +32,5 @@
 	    | "(" pattern ")" 	  ; parentheses
 	    | pattern "as" lident ; binding
   \
-  field-value ::= lqualid "=" term
-\end{syntax}
\ No newline at end of file
+  field-value ::= lqualid "=" term ";"
+\end{syntax}

doc/theory.bnf

 \begin{syntax}
   theory ::= "theory" uident label* decl* "end" 
   \
-  decl ::= "type" type-decl ("with" type-decl)*	   ;
-    | "logic" logic-decl ("with" logic-decl)*         ;
+  decl ::= "type" type-decl ("with" type-decl)* ;
+    | "function" function-decl ("with" logic-decl)* ;
+    | "predicate" predicate-decl ("with" logic-decl)* ;
     | "inductive" inductive-decl ("with" inductive-decl)* ;
     | "axiom" ident ":" formula 	   ;
     | "lemma" ident ":" formula 	   ;
@@ -22,9 +23,13 @@
   \
   record-field ::= lident label* ":" type
   \
-  logic-decl ::= lident label* type-param* ":" type ;
-    | lident label* type-param* ":" type "=" term   ;
-    | lident label* type-param*                     ;
+  logic-decl ::= function-decl ;
+    | predicate-decl
+  \
+  function-decl ::= lident label* type-param* ":" type ;
+    | lident label* type-param* ":" type "=" term
+  \
+  predicate-decl ::= lident label* type-param* ;
     | lident label* type-param* "=" formula
   \
   type-param ::= "'" lident   ;
@@ -45,7 +50,8 @@
   subst ::= "with" ("," subst-elt)+
   \
   subst-elt ::= "type" lqualid "=" lqualid ;
-    | "logic" lqualid "=" lqualid          ;
+    | "function" lqualid "=" lqualid          ;
+    | "predicate" lqualid "=" lqualid         ;
     | "namespace" (uqualid | ".") "=" (uqualid | ".")  ;
     | "lemma" uqualid 	  		   ;
     | "goal"  uqualid			   ;

doc/whyml.tex

@@ -102,7 +102,7 @@ problem statement.) The function body is a Hoare triple, that is a
 precondition, a program expression, and a postcondition.
 \begin{verbatim}
     let max_sum (a: array int) (n: int) =
-      { 0 <= n = length a and forall i:int. 0 <= i < n -> a[i] >= 0 }
+      { 0 <= n = length a /\ forall i:int. 0 <= i < n -> a[i] >= 0 }
        ... expression ...
       { let (sum, max) = result in sum <= n * max }
 \end{verbatim}
@@ -160,7 +160,7 @@ module MaxAndSum
   use import module array.Array
 
   let max_sum (a: array int) (n: int) =
-    { 0 <= n = length a and forall i:int. 0 <= i < n -> a[i] >= 0 }
+    { 0 <= n = length a /\ forall i:int. 0 <= i < n -> a[i] >= 0 }
     let sum = ref 0 in
     let max = ref 0 in
     for i = 0 to n - 1 do
@@ -218,16 +218,16 @@ It is convenient to introduce predicate definitions for the properties
 of being injective and surjective. These are purely logical
 declarations:
 \begin{verbatim}
-    logic injective (a: array int) (n: int) =
+    predicate injective (a: array int) (n: int) =
       forall i j: int. 0 <= i < n -> 0 <= j < n -> i <> j -> a[i] <> a[j]
 
-    logic surjective (a: array int) (n: int) =
-      forall i: int. 0 <= i < n -> exists j: int. (0 <= j < n and a[j] = i)
+    predicate surjective (a: array int) (n: int) =
+      forall i: int. 0 <= i < n -> exists j: int. (0 <= j < n /\ a[j] = i)
 \end{verbatim}
 It is also convenient to introduce the predicate ``being in the
 subrange from 0 to $n-1$'':
 \begin{verbatim}
-    logic range (a: array int) (n: int) =
+    predicate range (a: array int) (n: int) =
       forall i: int. 0 <= i < n -> 0 <= a[i] < n
 \end{verbatim}
 Using these predicates, we can formulate the assumption that any
@@ -244,7 +244,7 @@ Finally we can give the code a specification, with a loop invariant
 which simply expresses the values assigned to array \texttt{b} so far:
 \begin{verbatim}
     let inverting (a: array int) (b: array int) (n: int) =
-      { 0 <= n = length a = length b and injective a n and range a n }
+      { 0 <= n = length a = length b /\ injective a n /\ range a n }
       for i = 0 to n - 1 do
         invariant { forall j: int. 0 <= j < i -> b[a[j]] = j }
         b[a[i]] <- i
@@ -264,13 +264,13 @@ module InvertingAnInjection
   use import int.Int
   use import module array.Array
 
-  logic injective (a: array int) (n: int) =
+  predicate injective (a: array int) (n: int) =
     forall i j: int. 0 <= i < n -> 0 <= j < n -> i <> j -> a[i] <> a[j]
 
-  logic surjective (a: array int) (n: int) =
-    forall i: int. 0 <= i < n -> exists j: int. (0 <= j < n and a[j] = i)
+  predicate surjective (a: array int) (n: int) =
+    forall i: int. 0 <= i < n -> exists j: int. (0 <= j < n /\ a[j] = i)
 
-  logic range (a: array int) (n: int) =
+  predicate range (a: array int) (n: int) =
     forall i: int. 0 <= i < n -> 0 <= a[i] < n
 
   lemma injective_surjective:
@@ -278,7 +278,7 @@ module InvertingAnInjection
     injective a n -> range a n -> surjective a n
 
   let inverting (a: array int) (b: array int) (n: int) =
-    { 0 <= n = length a = length b and injective a n and range a n }
+    { 0 <= n = length a = length b /\ injective a n /\ range a n }
     for i = 0 to n - 1 do
       invariant { forall j: int. 0 <= j < i -> b[a[j]] = j }
       b[a[i]] <- i
@@ -323,12 +323,12 @@ depending on whether the index is meaningful or not.
 It is helpful to introduce two predicates: a first one
 for a successful search,
 \begin{verbatim}
-    logic zero_at (l: list int) (i: int) =
-      nth i l = Some 0 and forall j:int. 0 <= j < i -> nth j l <> Some 0
+    predicate zero_at (l: list int) (i: int) =
+      nth i l = Some 0 /\ forall j:int. 0 <= j < i -> nth j l <> Some 0
 \end{verbatim}
 and another for a non-successful search,
 \begin{verbatim}
-    logic no_zero (l: list int) =
+    predicate no_zero (l: list int) =
       forall j:int. 0 <= j < length l -> nth j l <> Some 0
 \end{verbatim}
 We are now in position to give the code for the search function.
@@ -359,12 +359,12 @@ There is no precondition for function \texttt{search}.
 The postcondition expresses that either a zero value is found, and
 consequently the value returned is bounded accordingly,
 \begin{verbatim}
-  i <= result < i + length l and zero_at l (result - i)
+  i <= result < i + length l /\ zero_at l (result - i)
 \end{verbatim}
 or no zero value was found, and thus the returned value is exactly
 \texttt{i} plus the length of \texttt{l}:
 \begin{verbatim}
-  result = i + length l and no_zero l
+  result = i + length l /\ no_zero l
 \end{verbatim}
 Solving the problem is simply a matter of calling \texttt{search} with
 0 as first argument.
@@ -380,10 +380,10 @@ module SearchingALinkedList
   use export list.Length
   use export list.Nth
 
-  logic zero_at (l: list int) (i: int) =
-    nth i l = Some 0 and forall j:int. 0 <= j < i -> nth j l <> Some 0
+  predicate zero_at (l: list int) (i: int) =
+    nth i l = Some 0 /\ forall j:int. 0 <= j < i -> nth j l <> Some 0
 
-  logic no_zero (l: list int) =
+  predicate no_zero (l: list int) =
     forall j:int. 0 <= j < length l -> nth j l <> Some 0
 
   let rec search (i: int) (l: list int) variant { length l } =
@@ -392,16 +392,16 @@ module SearchingALinkedList
     | Nil -> i
     | Cons x r -> if x = 0 then i else search (i+1) r
     end
-    { (i <= result < i + length l and zero_at l (result - i))
-      or
-      (result = i + length l and no_zero l) }
+    { (i <= result < i + length l /\ zero_at l (result - i))
+      \/
+      (result = i + length l /\ no_zero l) }
 
   let search_list (l: list int) =
     { }
     search 0 l
-    { (0 <= result < length l and zero_at l result)
-      or
-      (result = length l and no_zero l) }
+    { (0 <= result < length l /\ zero_at l result)
+      \/
+      (result = length l /\ no_zero l) }
 
 end
 \end{verbatim}
@@ -488,15 +488,15 @@ given row may attack another queen on a previous row. To verify this
 function, we first define a more elementary predicate, which expresses
 that queens on row \texttt{pos} and \texttt{q} do no attack each other:
 \begin{verbatim}
-    logic consistent_row (board: array int) (pos: int) (q: int) =
-      board[q] <> board[pos] and
-      board[q] - board[pos] <> pos - q and
+    predicate consistent_row (board: array int) (pos: int) (q: int) =
+      board[q] <> board[pos] /\
+      board[q] - board[pos] <> pos - q /\
       board[pos] - board[q] <> pos - q
 \end{verbatim}
 Then it is possible to define the consistency of row \texttt{pos}
 with respect to all previous rows:
 \begin{verbatim}
-    logic is_consistent (board: array int) (pos: int) =
+    predicate is_consistent (board: array int) (pos: int) =
       forall q:int. 0 <= q < pos -> consistent_row board pos q
 \end{verbatim}
 Implementing a function which decides this predicate is another
@@ -541,12 +541,12 @@ module NQueens
   use import int.Int
   use import module array.Array
 
-  logic consistent_row (board: array int) (pos: int) (q: int) =
-    board[q] <> board[pos] and
-    board[q] - board[pos] <> pos - q and
+  predicate consistent_row (board: array int) (pos: int) (q: int) =
+    board[q] <> board[pos] /\
+    board[q] - board[pos] <> pos - q /\
     board[pos] - board[q] <> pos - q
 
-  logic is_consistent (board: array int) (pos: int) =
+  predicate is_consistent (board: array int) (pos: int) =
     forall q:int. 0 <= q < pos -> consistent_row board pos q
 
   exception Inconsistent int
@@ -583,11 +583,11 @@ solution, up to a given row. It is even more convenient to split it in
 two predicates, one related to legal column values and another to
 consistency of rows:
 \begin{verbatim}
-    logic is_board (board: array int) (pos: int) =
+    predicate is_board (board: array int) (pos: int) =
       forall q:int. 0 <= q < pos -> 0 <= board[q] < length board
 
-    logic solution (board: array int) (pos: int) =
-      is_board board pos and
+    predicate solution (board: array int) (pos: int) =
+      is_board board pos /\
       forall q:int. 0 <= q < pos -> is_consistent board q
 \end{verbatim}
 The algorithm will not mutate the partial solution it is given and,
@@ -595,7 +595,7 @@ in case of a search failure, will claim that there is no solution
 extending this prefix. For this reason, we introduce a predicate
 comparing two chess boards for equality up to a given row:
 \begin{verbatim}
-    logic eq_board (b1 b2: array int) (pos: int) =
+    predicate eq_board (b1 b2: array int) (pos: int) =
       forall q:int. 0 <= q < pos -> b1[q] = b2[q]
 \end{verbatim}
 The search itself makes use of an exception to signal a successful search:
@@ -611,7 +611,7 @@ The termination is ensured by the obvious variant \texttt{n-pos}.
 The precondition relates \texttt{board}, \te