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] - chore(data/equiv/basic): arrow_congr preserves properties of binary operators #4759

Closed
wants to merge 6 commits into from

Conversation

eric-wieser
Copy link
Member


src/data/equiv/basic.lean Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
src/data/equiv/basic.lean Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
Co-authored-by: Johan Commelin <johan@commelin.net>
@jcommelin jcommelin added the awaiting-author A reviewer has asked the author a question or requested changes label Oct 24, 2020
@eric-wieser eric-wieser added awaiting-review The author would like community review of the PR and removed awaiting-author A reviewer has asked the author a question or requested changes labels Oct 24, 2020
@urkud
Copy link
Member

urkud commented Oct 25, 2020

I added function.semiconj₂ versions of some proofs and moved the new section below conj. BTW, you can write e.conj instead of e.arrow_congr e but you have to use the same form everywhere if you want lean to find instances.

@eric-wieser
Copy link
Member Author

eric-wieser commented Oct 25, 2020

My hope was that lean would be able to unfold conj to find the instances in this PR. Perhaps that's not how that works.

Would it make sense to add a e.conj₂ as a shorthand for e.arrow_congr (e.arrow_congr e)? (in a later PR?)

@urkud
Copy link
Member

urkud commented Oct 25, 2020

AFAIK, lean will be able to unfold conj if you make it reducible. BWT, what is your use case? If you want to transfer some standard algebraic structure (monoid etc), then we already have defs/lemmas for that.

@eric-wieser
Copy link
Member Author

BWT, what is your use case?

I needed two of these instances to call finset.fold, and figured I'd add the other easy ones. In turn, I wanted that to build a non-cheating proof for the to_dual 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.

LGTM, @urkud any comments?

@urkud
Copy link
Member

urkud commented Oct 28, 2020

@jcommelin LGTM
I didn't merge it because I golfed some proofs.

@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 Oct 29, 2020
bors bot pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Oct 29, 2020
…perators (#4759)

Co-authored-by: Yury G. Kudryashov <urkud@urkud.name>
@bors
Copy link

bors bot commented Oct 29, 2020

Pull request successfully merged into master.

Build succeeded:

@bors bors bot changed the title chore(data/equiv/basic): arrow_congr preserves properties of binary operators [Merged by Bors] - chore(data/equiv/basic): arrow_congr preserves properties of binary operators Oct 29, 2020
@bors bors bot closed this Oct 29, 2020
@bors bors bot deleted the eric-wieser/arrow_congr branch October 29, 2020 21:58
lecopivo pushed a commit to lecopivo/mathlib that referenced this pull request Oct 31, 2020
…perators (leanprover-community#4759)

Co-authored-by: Yury G. Kudryashov <urkud@urkud.name>
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

3 participants