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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom

[Merged by Bors] - General valued constraint satisfaction problem defined #7404

Closed
wants to merge 36 commits into from
Closed

[Merged by Bors] - General valued constraint satisfaction problem defined #7404

wants to merge 36 commits into from

Conversation

madvorak
Copy link
Collaborator

@madvorak madvorak commented Sep 27, 2023 •
edited
Loading

@madvorak madvorak added the awaiting-review The author would like community review of the PR label Sep 27, 2023
@eric-wieser
Copy link
Member

Does ofArity already exist?

No, but Arity does, which would only need a tiny generalization to cover your case.

@madvorak
Copy link
Collaborator Author

Does ofArity already exist?

No, but Arity does, which would only need a tiny generalization to cover your case.

Does it mean I should replace the existing definition Arity by my definition on order to have only one?

@eric-wieser
Copy link
Member

Sure, but here "replace" is really just "add one more argument to"

@madvorak madvorak added WIP Work in progress and removed awaiting-review The author would like community review of the PR labels Sep 28, 2023
github-actions[bot]
github-actions bot reviewed Sep 29, 2023
View reviewed changes
Mathlib.lean Show resolved Hide resolved
@madvorak madvorak changed the title General valued constraint satisfaction problem: template defined General valued constraint satisfaction problem defined Sep 29, 2023
@madvorak madvorak added the RFC Request for comment label Sep 29, 2023
@madvorak
Copy link
Collaborator Author

Some more smaller comments.

One last remark: this file currently only contains definitions. You have plans to actually prove things about these definitions, right?

Yes, but those theorems will require a lot more definitions that build on these definitions. Therefore, I would like to get these definitions merged first, as large PRs take forever to review.

@madvorak madvorak added awaiting-author A reviewer has asked the author a question or requested changes and removed awaiting-review The author would like community review of the PR labels Oct 23, 2023
github-actions[bot]
github-actions bot reviewed Oct 23, 2023
View reviewed changes
Mathlib.lean Show resolved Hide resolved
@madvorak madvorak 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 23, 2023
@madvorak @eric-wieser
Update Mathlib/Combinatorics/Optimization/Deleteme.lean
81cd487 
Co-authored-by: Eric Wieser <wieser.eric@gmail.com>
fpvandoorn
fpvandoorn approved these changes Oct 23, 2023
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Member

@fpvandoorn fpvandoorn left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM after Deleteme is deleted.

madvorak and others added 2 commits October 24, 2023 06:57
@madvorak @eric-wieser
Update Mathlib/Combinatorics/Optimization/ValuedCSP.lean
ac9d025 
Co-authored-by: Eric Wieser <wieser.eric@gmail.com>
@madvorak @eric-wieser
Update Mathlib/Combinatorics/Optimization/ValuedCSP.lean
8e701f5 
Co-authored-by: Eric Wieser <wieser.eric@gmail.com>
@fpvandoorn
Copy link
Member

Thanks!

bors merge

@github-actions github-actions 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 Oct 24, 2023
bors bot pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Oct 24, 2023
@madvorak
General valued constraint satisfaction problem defined (#7404)
9eb5aaf
@bors
Copy link

bors bot commented Oct 24, 2023

Pull request successfully merged into master.

Build succeeded!

The publicly hosted instance of bors-ng is deprecated and will go away soon.

If you want to self-host your own instance, instructions are here.
For more help, visit the forum.

If you want to switch to GitHub's built-in merge queue, visit their help page.

@bors bors bot changed the title General valued constraint satisfaction problem defined [Merged by Bors] - General valued constraint satisfaction problem defined Oct 24, 2023
@bors bors bot closed this Oct 24, 2023
@bors bors bot deleted the vcsp branch October 24, 2023 11:11
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@eric-wieser eric-wieser eric-wieser left review comments

@alexjbest alexjbest alexjbest left review comments

@github-actions github-actions[bot] github-actions left review comments

@apurvanakade apurvanakade apurvanakade left review comments

@fpvandoorn fpvandoorn fpvandoorn approved these changes

@erdOne erdOne Awaiting requested review from erdOne

@digama0 digama0 Awaiting requested review from digama0

@JasonKYi JasonKYi Awaiting requested review from JasonKYi

@JanaGoeken JanaGoeken Awaiting requested review from JanaGoeken

@khoek khoek Awaiting requested review from khoek

@b-mehta b-mehta Awaiting requested review from b-mehta

Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
ready-to-merge This PR has been sent to bors.
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet
5 participants
@madvorak @eric-wieser @fpvandoorn @alexjbest @apurvanakade