Do the `>>` operator as in `p1 >> p2` means the proof p1 is changed into the proof p2 in place?
> Then a function call f(..., pf, ...) on some proof variable
> pf of the view V1 is to change the view of pf into V2 upon
> its return. In the case where V1 and V2 are the same,
> !V1 >> V2 can simply be written as !V1.
The interpretation I make of it is uncertain to me.
If it's really as I guess, that is it change a proof into another in place, then why not returning a new proof instead? May be the reason is the key to understand this operator.