-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 26
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Incompatabilities #30
Comments
There's an outstanding PR to make it compile with 2.5.4.2 that I need to take care of. It's essentially ready, so I should just make the tiny change myself that it needs. Then we can see. I have not tried it at all yet, so I just don't know! |
So I tried. I think it might have worked for 2.5.4.2, but it doesn't work for 2.6. I think it's time for a redesign. For example, using |
@JacquesCarette are you working on it already? do you have a repo available? |
I have started some work, but have pushed nothing, as I was still struggling with all the dependencies for just rebuilding the I was originally thinking of using my fork https://github.com/JacquesCarette/categories for doing the experiments. But I'm not even sure that's a good idea, as I'm pretty sure this will end up being a rebuild almost from scratch. Lastly, I definitely want to rebuild this based on 2.6 as much as possible, and in an incremental way, as there does seem to be willingness (agda/agda-stdlib#652) to migrate this into stdlib. |
Long story short: I welcome any and all suggestions you may have as to how to proceed! |
it seems the library does not only depend on irrelevance but also K (in some part). I would prefer a relevant library because irrelence is an uninvertible loss of information, which I tend to avoid. I will experiment these couple days. |
https://github.com/HuStmpHrrr/agda-categories I tried to define natural transformations and two compositions relevantly without using K and other postulations. it seems to work out well. do you have any concern? |
Thanks - I will try to look as soon as possible. But that may well be Friday. |
@HuStmpHrrr It really does seem to work quite well! Seems very much worth continuing along that path. Would you welcome PRs? I'd like to try to do both Adjunctions (as I need them now) and Monoidal categories (to resurrect old work) as a further test. It's also nice that you were able to do things via using more of the standard library, instead of homebrewed setoid reasoning. |
@JacquesCarette definitely I welcome PRs. I think I will just authorize you to push directly. In fact I don't intend to make this my personal repo. do you know how to make it a project under the agda group? |
Thanks. And let me ask. |
@JacquesCarette were you invited into the Agda group? I am not, so I am hoping that you could create the project and push what exists. do you get a chance to tale a look? |
I did. I just didn't get a chance to create the sub-project yet. I'll do it today. |
Where by 'today' I meant within 24 hours... done now, and I've sent you a contributor request. And I just realized that you're probably less than 5 kms for me! I live in Waterloo too. |
thx I accepted. how come? but you work in Hamilton, no? so you commute far. |
History. I used to work in Waterloo (at Maplesoft), my wife still does. Yes, I commute far. But I'm now quite used to it. |
that is very cool. I just pushed the commits to the new repo so I think it's set. |
Since the new library works and is an almost 100% port, this is now obsolete, closing. |
I am wondering how far is it to resolve the incompatibilities of this library to up-to-date agda?
Agda has reached 2.6 and I am eager to try in near future but I am not sure how far is it for this library to be ready.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: