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] - refactor(ring_theory/ideal/operations): split quotients to a new file #18531

Closed
wants to merge 6 commits into from

Conversation

eric-wieser
Copy link
Member

@eric-wieser eric-wieser commented Mar 1, 2023

This file is growing quite long.

Splitting it will reduce dependencies in (some) downstream files, and by becoming shorter also makes this file easier to edit and port.

This doesn't attempt to change any proofs in downstream files; instead, it just adds new imports to keep them compiling.
There are 9 downstream files which no longer depend on the quotient_operations file, although one of these now depends on ring_theory.ideal.quotient.
A future PR will remove the ring_theory.ideal.quotient_operations import from more files.


Open in Gitpod

Split from #18530

@@ -8,6 +8,7 @@ import algebra.algebra.restrict_scalars
import algebra.algebra.subalgebra.basic
import group_theory.finiteness
import ring_theory.ideal.operations
import ring_theory.ideal.quotient
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I think you can avoid this import by tweaking 1 proof a tiny little bit.

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Happy for me to do that as a follow-up? I agree that your proof in #18530 is nice here, but figure that it's fine to remain either in your PR or in another spin-off I can make tomorrow from https://github.com/leanprover-community/mathlib/tree/eric-wieser/finitenes-no-quotient (assuming it passes CI)

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Yes, please create a follow-up PR.

@eric-wieser eric-wieser added awaiting-review The author would like community review of the PR t-algebra Algebra (groups, rings, fields etc) labels Mar 1, 2023
@jcommelin
Copy link
Member

Thanks 🎉

bors merge

@github-actions github-actions bot added ready-to-merge All that is left is for bors to build and merge this PR. (Remember you need to say `bors r+`.) and removed awaiting-review The author would like community review of the PR labels Mar 2, 2023
bors bot pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Mar 2, 2023
…#18531)

This file is growing quite long.

Splitting it will reduce dependencies in (some) downstream files, and by becoming shorter also makes this file easier to edit and port.

This doesn't attempt to change any proofs in downstream files; instead, it just adds new imports to keep them compiling.
There are 9 downstream files which no longer depend on the `quotient_operations` file, although one of these now depends on `ring_theory.ideal.quotient`.
A future PR will remove the `ring_theory.ideal.quotient_operations` import from more files.



Co-authored-by: Eric Wieser <wieser.eric@gmail.com>
@bors
Copy link

bors bot commented Mar 2, 2023

Pull request successfully merged into master.

Build succeeded:

@bors bors bot changed the title refactor(ring_theory/ideal/operations): split quotients to a new file [Merged by Bors] - refactor(ring_theory/ideal/operations): split quotients to a new file Mar 2, 2023
@bors bors bot closed this Mar 2, 2023
@bors bors bot deleted the eric-wieser/split-ideal.operations branch March 2, 2023 09:27
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+`.) t-algebra Algebra (groups, rings, fields etc)
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

2 participants