Focus on one or-case

Stream: new members

[Marcus Rossel]

How do I ignore one of the possible cases when the goal of a proof is a disjunction?
E.g.:

example {p q : ℕ → Prop} : (∃ n, p n) ∨ (q 0) :=
begin

end

Let's say I know that I can prove the left case, and want to use tactics like existsi on it.
I can't do this currently because the ∨ (q 0) is blocking it. How can I get rid of the ∨ (q 0)?

Note: I would like to avoid suffices h : (∃ n, p n), from or.inl h, since my actual (∃ n, p n) is pretty long.

[Eric Wieser]

left or apply or.inl