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: More big operator lemmas #10551

Closed
wants to merge 26 commits into from

Conversation

YaelDillies
Copy link
Collaborator

From LeanAPAP


Open in Gitpod

Mathlib/Algebra/BigOperators/Basic.lean Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
Mathlib/Algebra/BigOperators/Pi.lean Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
Mathlib/Algebra/BigOperators/Pi.lean Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
@YaelDillies YaelDillies added awaiting-review The author would like community review of the PR t-algebra Algebra (groups, rings, fields etc) labels Feb 14, 2024
YaelDillies and others added 3 commits February 14, 2024 19:28
Co-authored-by: github-actions[bot] <41898282+github-actions[bot]@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: github-actions[bot] <41898282+github-actions[bot]@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: github-actions[bot] <41898282+github-actions[bot]@users.noreply.github.com>
Mathlib/Algebra/BigOperators/Pi.lean Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
Mathlib/Algebra/BigOperators/Pi.lean Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
@YaelDillies YaelDillies mentioned this pull request Feb 14, 2024
1 task
Mathlib/Algebra/BigOperators/Basic.lean Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
Mathlib/Algebra/BigOperators/Basic.lean Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
Mathlib/Algebra/BigOperators/Basic.lean Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
@leanprover-community-mathlib4-bot leanprover-community-mathlib4-bot removed the merge-conflict The PR has a merge conflict with master, and needs manual merging. label Mar 30, 2024
@leanprover-community-mathlib4-bot leanprover-community-mathlib4-bot added the merge-conflict The PR has a merge conflict with master, and needs manual merging. label Apr 5, 2024
@leanprover-community-mathlib4-bot leanprover-community-mathlib4-bot removed the merge-conflict The PR has a merge conflict with master, and needs manual merging. label Apr 5, 2024
@leanprover-community-mathlib4-bot leanprover-community-mathlib4-bot added the merge-conflict The PR has a merge conflict with master, and needs manual merging. label Apr 15, 2024
@leanprover-community-mathlib4-bot leanprover-community-mathlib4-bot removed the merge-conflict The PR has a merge conflict with master, and needs manual merging. label Apr 15, 2024
Copy link
Collaborator

@Ruben-VandeVelde Ruben-VandeVelde left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Looks okay for as far as I understand what's going on :)

@@ -2256,6 +2293,52 @@ theorem prod_subtype_mul_prod_subtype {α β : Type*} [Fintype α] [CommMonoid
#align fintype.prod_subtype_mul_prod_subtype Fintype.prod_subtype_mul_prod_subtype
#align fintype.sum_subtype_add_sum_subtype Fintype.sum_subtype_add_sum_subtype

@[to_additive] lemma prod_subset {s : Finset ι} {f : ι → α} (h : ∀ i, f i ≠ 1 → i ∈ s) :
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Any reason not to match x ∉ s₁ → f x = 1 from Finset.prod_subset?

Copy link
Collaborator Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

It's much more useful this way, I find, as it can be interpreted as saying that the support of f is a subset of s. Finset.prod_subset can't really afford to be stated like that as it instead wants to emphasize s₁ \ s₂.

Mathlib/Data/Finset/Union.lean Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
Copy link
Member

@kbuzzard kbuzzard left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I don't really know this part of the library but the code/naming etc looks fine.

@leanprover-community-mathlib4-bot leanprover-community-mathlib4-bot added the merge-conflict The PR has a merge conflict with master, and needs manual merging. label Apr 29, 2024
@leanprover-community-mathlib4-bot leanprover-community-mathlib4-bot removed the merge-conflict The PR has a merge conflict with master, and needs manual merging. label Apr 29, 2024
@Ruben-VandeVelde
Copy link
Collaborator

maintainer merge

Copy link

🚀 Pull request has been placed on the maintainer queue by Ruben-VandeVelde.

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

@leanprover-community-mathlib4-bot leanprover-community-mathlib4-bot added ready-to-merge This PR has been sent to bors. and removed awaiting-review The author would like community review of the PR labels Apr 30, 2024
mathlib-bors bot pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Apr 30, 2024
@mathlib-bors
Copy link

mathlib-bors bot commented Apr 30, 2024

Pull request successfully merged into master.

Build succeeded:

@mathlib-bors mathlib-bors bot changed the title feat: More big operator lemmas [Merged by Bors] - feat: More big operator lemmas Apr 30, 2024
@mathlib-bors mathlib-bors bot closed this Apr 30, 2024
@mathlib-bors mathlib-bors bot deleted the prod_fiberwise_eq_prod_filter branch April 30, 2024 06:07
apnelson1 pushed a commit that referenced this pull request May 12, 2024
callesonne pushed a commit that referenced this pull request May 16, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
maintainer-merge ready-to-merge This PR has been sent to bors. t-algebra Algebra (groups, rings, fields etc)
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

6 participants