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

Slow unification of ContinuousLinearMap.comp (ContinuousLinearMap.adjoint) and star * #11299

Open
mattrobball opened this issue Mar 11, 2024 · 0 comments

Comments

@mattrobball
Copy link
Collaborator

mattrobball commented Mar 11, 2024

In Mathlib.Analysis.InnerProductSpace.Unitary, unitary.star_mul_self_of_mem hu for (hu : u ∈ unitary (H →L[𝕜] H)) elaborates slowly thanks to slow unification checks [1.068378s] ✅ ContinuousLinearMap.comp (ContinuousLinearMap.adjoint u) u =?= star ?a * ?b.

@mattrobball mattrobball changed the title Slow unification of Slow unification of ContinuousLinearMap.comp (ContinuousLinearMap.adjoint) and star * Mar 11, 2024
mathlib-bors bot pushed a commit that referenced this issue Mar 11, 2024
For as yet un-completely diagnosed reasons, `unitary.star_mul_self_of_mem hu` for `(hu : u ∈ unitary (H →L[𝕜] H))` elaborates slowly thanks to `[1.068378s] ✅ ContinuousLinearMap.comp (ContinuousLinearMap.adjoint u) u =?= star ?a * ?b`. This PR pulls out the statements into `have`'s which speeds up the proofs significantly. #11299 documents the issue for future investigation.
kbuzzard pushed a commit that referenced this issue Mar 12, 2024
For as yet un-completely diagnosed reasons, `unitary.star_mul_self_of_mem hu` for `(hu : u ∈ unitary (H →L[𝕜] H))` elaborates slowly thanks to `[1.068378s] ✅ ContinuousLinearMap.comp (ContinuousLinearMap.adjoint u) u =?= star ?a * ?b`. This PR pulls out the statements into `have`'s which speeds up the proofs significantly. #11299 documents the issue for future investigation.
dagurtomas pushed a commit that referenced this issue Mar 22, 2024
For as yet un-completely diagnosed reasons, `unitary.star_mul_self_of_mem hu` for `(hu : u ∈ unitary (H →L[𝕜] H))` elaborates slowly thanks to `[1.068378s] ✅ ContinuousLinearMap.comp (ContinuousLinearMap.adjoint u) u =?= star ?a * ?b`. This PR pulls out the statements into `have`'s which speeds up the proofs significantly. #11299 documents the issue for future investigation.
utensil pushed a commit that referenced this issue Mar 26, 2024
For as yet un-completely diagnosed reasons, `unitary.star_mul_self_of_mem hu` for `(hu : u ∈ unitary (H →L[𝕜] H))` elaborates slowly thanks to `[1.068378s] ✅ ContinuousLinearMap.comp (ContinuousLinearMap.adjoint u) u =?= star ?a * ?b`. This PR pulls out the statements into `have`'s which speeds up the proofs significantly. #11299 documents the issue for future investigation.
Louddy pushed a commit that referenced this issue Apr 15, 2024
For as yet un-completely diagnosed reasons, `unitary.star_mul_self_of_mem hu` for `(hu : u ∈ unitary (H →L[𝕜] H))` elaborates slowly thanks to `[1.068378s] ✅ ContinuousLinearMap.comp (ContinuousLinearMap.adjoint u) u =?= star ?a * ?b`. This PR pulls out the statements into `have`'s which speeds up the proofs significantly. #11299 documents the issue for future investigation.
uniwuni pushed a commit that referenced this issue Apr 19, 2024
For as yet un-completely diagnosed reasons, `unitary.star_mul_self_of_mem hu` for `(hu : u ∈ unitary (H →L[𝕜] H))` elaborates slowly thanks to `[1.068378s] ✅ ContinuousLinearMap.comp (ContinuousLinearMap.adjoint u) u =?= star ?a * ?b`. This PR pulls out the statements into `have`'s which speeds up the proofs significantly. #11299 documents the issue for future investigation.
callesonne pushed a commit that referenced this issue Apr 22, 2024
For as yet un-completely diagnosed reasons, `unitary.star_mul_self_of_mem hu` for `(hu : u ∈ unitary (H →L[𝕜] H))` elaborates slowly thanks to `[1.068378s] ✅ ContinuousLinearMap.comp (ContinuousLinearMap.adjoint u) u =?= star ?a * ?b`. This PR pulls out the statements into `have`'s which speeds up the proofs significantly. #11299 documents the issue for future investigation.
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

1 participant