Lean migration: typeclass-based parameter passing, as in the Agda original

The port had flattened Agda's instance arguments ({{flA}}, {{evaluator}},
{{latticeInterpretation}}, {{validEvaluator}}) into explicitly threaded
values (fhL, E, I, hE). Restore them as typeclasses:

- Spa.FiniteHeightLattice: now actually used — Fixedpoint takes the
  instance instead of a FixedHeight value; FiniteMap gets the missing
  instance (height = ks.length * height B), so varsFixedHeight /
  statesFixedHeight / signFixedHeight / constFixedHeight plumbing
  disappears (instance bottoms are defeq to the old ones)
- Spa.Analysis.Forward.Evaluation: StmtEvaluator/ExprEvaluator become
  classes; the Valid* Props become Prop-classes, as in Agda
- Spa.Analysis.Forward.Adapters: the expr→stmt adapter and its validity
  are instances (Agda: the ExprToStmtAdapter instances)
- LatticeInterpretation is a class; sign/const interpretations,
  evaluators and validity proofs are instances; use sites read like the
  Agda module applications: result SignLattice prog

Proof simplifications (same theorems, proofs factored):

- Spa.Lattice.AboveBelow.monotone₂_of_strict: any ⊥-strict/⊤-dominated
  operation on a flat lattice is monotone — replaces the four near-
  identical case bashes per analysis (postulates in Agda)
- Spa.Lattice.AboveBelow.interp_sup_of/interp_inf_of: the shared flat-
  lattice interpretation case analysis, making interpSign_sup/inf and
  interpConst_sup/inf one-liners

lake build green with zero warnings; lake exe spa output verified
byte-identical (diff) to the previous, Agda-verified output.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Fable 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>

lean/Spa/Lattice/AboveBelow.lean

@@ -155,6 +155,75 @@ theorem le_cases {a b : AboveBelow α} (h : a ≤ b) :
     · rw [if_neg hxy] at hsup
       exact absurd hsup (by simp)
 
+/-- Monotonicity for *strict* operations on flat lattices: if `f` sends `⊥` to
+`⊥` (in either argument) and `⊤` to `⊤` (against any non-`⊥` argument), it is
+monotone in both arguments — regardless of its values on plain elements.
+`Analysis/Sign.agda` and `Analysis/Constant.agda` postulated exactly these
+monotonicity facts for their `plus`/`minus`, all of which have this shape. -/
+theorem monotone₂_of_strict {β γ : Type*} [DecidableEq β] [DecidableEq γ]
+    (f : AboveBelow α → AboveBelow β → AboveBelow γ)
+    (hbotl : ∀ y, f bot y = bot) (hbotr : ∀ x, f x bot = bot)
+    (htopl : ∀ y, y ≠ bot → f top y = top)
+    (htopr : ∀ x, x ≠ bot → f x top = top) : Monotone₂ f := by
+  constructor
+  · intro y a b hab
+    show f a y ≤ f b y
+    rcases le_cases hab with rfl | rfl | rfl
+    · rw [hbotl]; exact bot_le' _
+    · rcases eq_or_ne y bot with rfl | hy
+      · rw [hbotr, hbotr]
+      · rw [htopl y hy]; exact le_top' _
+    · exact le_rfl
+  · intro x a b hab
+    rcases le_cases hab with rfl | rfl | rfl
+    · rw [hbotr]; exact bot_le' _
+    · rcases eq_or_ne x bot with rfl | hx
+      · rw [hbotl, hbotl]
+      · rw [htopr x hx]; exact le_top' _
+    · exact le_rfl
+
+/-! ### Interpretations of flat lattices
+
+The `⟦⟧-⊔-∨` / `⟦⟧-⊓-∧` proofs of `Analysis/Sign.agda` and
+`Analysis/Constant.agda` are the same case analysis; only the meaning of the
+plain elements differs. Factored here, they need just `P ⊥ ↦ False`,
+`P ⊤ ↦ True`, and (for `⊓`) disjointness of distinct plain elements. -/
+
+section Interp
+
+variable {V : Type*} {P : AboveBelow α → V → Prop}
+
+/-- Agda: `⟦⟧ᵍ-⊔ᵍ-∨` / `⟦⟧ᶜ-⊔ᶜ-∨`, generalized. -/
+theorem interp_sup_of (hbot : ∀ v, ¬P bot v) (htop : ∀ v, P top v)
+    {s₁ s₂ : AboveBelow α} (v : V) (h : P s₁ v ∨ P s₂ v) : P (s₁ ⊔ s₂) v := by
+  rcases s₁ with _ | _ | x
+  · rw [bot_sup]; exact h.resolve_left (hbot v)
+  · rw [top_sup]; exact htop v
+  · rcases s₂ with _ | _ | y
+    · rw [sup_bot]; exact h.resolve_right (hbot v)
+    · rw [sup_top]; exact htop v
+    · rw [mk_sup_mk]
+      split
+      · next heq => subst heq; exact h.elim id id
+      · exact htop v
+
+/-- Agda: `⟦⟧ᵍ-⊓ᵍ-∧` / `⟦⟧ᶜ-⊓ᶜ-∧`, generalized. -/
+theorem interp_inf_of
+    (hdisj : ∀ {x y : α}, x ≠ y → ∀ v, ¬(P (mk x) v ∧ P (mk y) v))
+    {s₁ s₂ : AboveBelow α} (v : V) (h : P s₁ v ∧ P s₂ v) : P (s₁ ⊓ s₂) v := by
+  rcases s₁ with _ | _ | x
+  · rw [bot_inf]; exact h.1
+  · rw [top_inf]; exact h.2
+  · rcases s₂ with _ | _ | y
+    · rw [inf_bot]; exact h.2
+    · rw [inf_top]; exact h.1
+    · rw [mk_inf_mk]
+      split
+      · next heq => subst heq; exact h.1
+      · next hne => exact absurd h (hdisj hne v)
+
+end Interp
+
 /-- Rank of an element: `⊥ ↦ 0`, `[x] ↦ 1`, `⊤ ↦ 2`. Used to bound chains
 (Agda's `isLongest` / `x≺[y]⇒x≡⊥` / `[x]≺y⇒y≡⊤` case analysis lives here). -/
 def rank : AboveBelow α → ℕ