Given α : Sort u, nonemp : nonempty α, p : α → Prop, a context of local variables ctxt, and a pair of an element val : α and spec : p val, mk_sometimes u α nonemp p ctx (val, spec) produces another pair val', spec' such that val' does not have any free variables from elements of ctxt whose types are propositions. This is done by applying function.sometimes to abstract over all the propositional arguments.

Changes (h : ∀xs, ∃a:α, p a) ⊢ g to (d : ∀xs, a) (s : ∀xs, p (d xs)) ⊢ g and (h : ∀xs, p xs ∧ q xs) ⊢ g to (d : ∀xs, p xs) (s : ∀xs, q xs) ⊢ g. choose1 returns a pair of the second local constant it introduces, and the error result (see below).

If nondep is true and α is inhabited, then it will remove the dependency of d on all propositional assumptions in xs. For example if ys are propositions then (h : ∀xs ys, ∃a:α, p a) ⊢ g becomes (d : ∀xs, a) (s : ∀xs ys, p (d xs)) ⊢ g.

The second value returned by choose1 is the result of nondep elimination:

• none: nondep elimination was not attempted or was not applicable
• some none: nondep elimination was successful
• some (some `(nonempty α)): nondep elimination was unsuccessful because we could not find a nonempty α instance

Changes (h : ∀xs, ∃as, p as ∧ q as) ⊢ g to a list of functions as, and a final hypothesis on p as and q as. If nondep is true then the functions will be made to not depend on propositional arguments, when possible.

The last argument is an internal recursion variable, indicating whether nondep elimination has been useful so far. The tactic fails if nondep is true, and nondep elimination is attempted at least once, and it fails every time it is attempted, in which case it returns an error complaining about the first attempt.

choose a b h h' using hyp takes an hypothesis hyp of the form ∀ (x : X) (y : Y), ∃ (a : A) (b : B), P x y a b ∧ Q x y a b for some P Q : X → Y → A → B → Prop and outputs into context a function a : X → Y → A, b : X → Y → B and two assumptions: h : ∀ (x : X) (y : Y), P x y (a x y) (b x y) and h' : ∀ (x : X) (y : Y), Q x y (a x y) (b x y). It also works with dependent versions.

choose! a b h h' using hyp does the same, except that it will remove dependency of the functions on propositional arguments if possible. For example if Y is a proposition and A and B are nonempty in the above example then we will instead get a : X → A, b : X → B, and the assumptions h : ∀ (x : X) (y : Y), P x y (a x) (b x) and h' : ∀ (x : X) (y : Y), Q x y (a x) (b x).

Examples:

example (h : ∀n m : ℕ, ∃i j, m = n + i ∨ m + j = n) : true :=
begin
  choose i j h using h,
  guard_hyp i : ℕ → ℕ → ℕ,
  guard_hyp j : ℕ → ℕ → ℕ,
  guard_hyp h : ∀ (n m : ℕ), m = n + i n m ∨ m + j n m = n,
  trivial
end

example (h : ∀ i : ℕ, i < 7 → ∃ j, i < j ∧ j < i+i) : true :=
begin
  choose! f h h' using h,
  guard_hyp f : ℕ → ℕ,
  guard_hyp h : ∀ (i : ℕ), i < 7 → i < f i,
  guard_hyp h' : ∀ (i : ℕ), i < 7 → f i < i + i,
  trivial,
end