Code gen for tuple instances #82
Conversation
|
This looks great. Could you add support for (at least) In theory we could support all the other variants (e.g. the commutative versions, |
…es, and fix needless comparison in order instances
| implicit val band = new Band[(Int, Int)] { | ||
| def combine(a: (Int, Int), b: (Int, Int)) = (a._1, b._2) | ||
| } | ||
| checkAll("(Int, Int) Band", GroupLaws[(Int, Int)].band) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
why did you delete this band test? If nothing else it was exercising GroupLaws.band.
|
@non you steered him wrong on Field, my friend. |
|
Of course, it would be cool to have a Galois fields for tuples of Boolean. :) (which is the one exception that pops to mind for standard scala types, but it does not compose this way). |
|
@johnynek Thanks for your feedback, will address them soon! I'm out of town for the weekend so most likely won't be able to do anything until next week. |
| - def negate(x: ${`(A..N)`}): ${`(A..N)`} = ${unaryTuple("negate")} | ||
| - def one: ${`(A..N)`} = ${nullaryTuple("one")} | ||
| - def plus(x: ${`(A..N)`}, y: ${`(A..N)`}): ${`(A..N)`} = ${binTuple("plus")} | ||
| - def quot(x: ${`(A..N)`}, y: ${`(A..N)`}): ${`(A..N)`} = ${binTuple("quot")} |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I'm skeptical of this one as well. Can you add a test that checks that (Int, Int) forms a EuclideanRing? I don't know as much about the theory of euclidean rings, so I don't know off hand the answer.
|
👍 |
|
@johnynek I encouraged @adelbertc to add the euclidean ring instance (as well as the erroneous field instance). I'm pretty sure it's OK (although I haven't written a proof yet) but if you are nervous I would be willing to remove it (and obviously apologize to @adelbertc for suggesting the work). |
|
Yeah, I guess it works for a Euclidean Ring, but I noticed that we don't actually have a test for Euclidean Rings. It is currently a TODO and actually just checking the Ring laws. +1 from me. Added #85 |
No description provided.