Skip to content
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

[Merged by Bors] - feat(group_theory/subgroup): add mem_map_of_mem #7459

Closed
wants to merge 16 commits into from

Conversation

riccardobrasca
Copy link
Member

@riccardobrasca riccardobrasca commented May 4, 2021

From LTE.

Written by @PatrickMassot


Open in Gitpod

@riccardobrasca riccardobrasca added the awaiting-review The author would like community review of the PR label May 4, 2021
Co-authored-by: Eric Wieser <wieser.eric@gmail.com>
@eric-wieser
Copy link
Member

Oh, it turns out that submodule.mem_map_of_mem uses the mem version after all. So maybe the way forward is:

  • Make the submonoid version match the submodule version (and your original version), by renaming mem_map_of_mem' back to mem_map_of_mem (sorry!)
  • Rename the mem_map_of_mem that you have right now to apply_coe_mem_map, and add it for submodule too. After all, the of_mem part of the name is a lie.

riccardobrasca and others added 6 commits May 4, 2021 12:03
Co-authored-by: Eric Wieser <wieser.eric@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: Eric Wieser <wieser.eric@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: Eric Wieser <wieser.eric@gmail.com>
@jcommelin jcommelin requested a review from eric-wieser May 6, 2021 14:04
(ϕ.map (M.mem_map_of_mem (φ : P'.quotient →* P.quotient)) ϕ') _ _,
(ϕ.map (submonoid.apply_coe_mem_map (φ : P'.quotient →* P.quotient)) ϕ') _ _,
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

What's your preference for M being implicit vs implicit here @riccardobrasca? I'm happy either way, and only really care about consistency between the lemmas that share names. I'm fine with it as you have it now, but I'm also fine with you making s, p etc explicit in all the new lemmas.

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

What about leaving the variable implicit in mem_map_of_mem (that seems the standard in mathlib), but explicit in apply_coe_mem_map to allow dot notation as it is currently used?

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Oh, there are a lot of mem_map_of_mem... I guess I will open another PR to add all the corresponding apply_coe_mem_map when we have decided which form is better.

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I agree that this can be postponed to a later PR.

Copy link
Member

@jcommelin jcommelin left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Thanks 🎉

bors merge

@github-actions github-actions bot added the ready-to-merge All that is left is for bors to build and merge this PR. (Remember you need to say `bors r+`.) label May 10, 2021
@github-actions github-actions bot removed the awaiting-review The author would like community review of the PR label May 10, 2021
bors bot pushed a commit that referenced this pull request May 10, 2021
From LTE.

Written by @PatrickMassot 



Co-authored-by: Patrick Massot <patrickmassot@free.fr>
@bors
Copy link

bors bot commented May 10, 2021

Pull request successfully merged into master.

Build succeeded:

@bors bors bot changed the title feat(group_theory/subgroup): add mem_map_of_mem [Merged by Bors] - feat(group_theory/subgroup): add mem_map_of_mem May 10, 2021
@bors bors bot closed this May 10, 2021
@bors bors bot deleted the mem_map_of_mem branch May 10, 2021 12:35
bors bot pushed a commit that referenced this pull request May 10, 2021
From LTE.

Written by @PatrickMassot 

- [x] depends on: #7459 



Co-authored-by: Patrick Massot <patrickmassot@free.fr>
bors bot pushed a commit that referenced this pull request May 14, 2021
This is a continuation of #7459. In this PR:

- We modify `ideal.mem_map_of_mem` in order to be consistent with `submonoid.mem_map_of_mem`.
- We modify `submonoid.apply_coe_mem_map` (and friends) to have the submonoid as an explicit variable. This was the case before #7459 (but with a different, and not consistent, name). It seems to me that this version makes the code more readable.
- We add `ideal.apply_coe_mem_map` (similar to `submonoid.apply_coe_mem_map`).

Note that `mem_map_of_mem` is used in other places, for example we have `multiset.mem_map_of_mem`, but since a multiset is not a type there is no `apply_coe_mem_map` to add there.
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
ready-to-merge All that is left is for bors to build and merge this PR. (Remember you need to say `bors r+`.)
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

4 participants