[tlaplus] Operators interpretation -- leads_to

[gamesec2017@xxxxxxxxx]

Hello all,

I've recently started working on TLA+ and came across something that I can't quite understand.

I have been experimenting with the leads_to operator. It's clear to me that F ~> G is equivalent to [] ( F => <> G ) (1)

Now, let's consider a liveness properties of the form:

\forall a \in A: (a.something = "value_1") ~> (b.something_else = "value") (2)

When expressing the same using (1), it should look like:

\forall a \in A: [] ( (a.something = "value_1") => <> (b.something_else = "value") ) (3)

Is that right?

Then another question is -- how's the following property interpreted?

[] (\forall a \in A: (a.something = "value_1") => <> (b.something_else = "value") ) (4)

which still parses, thus it's a valid TLA+ formula.


Thank you in advance,

James.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "tlaplus" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to tlaplus+unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx.
To post to this group, send email to tlaplus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/tlaplus.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tlaplus/2519d1d2-e6fa-4087-9f58-e8a8db271ff3%40googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.