feat: unify equational theorems between wf and structural recursion #5055
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
by removing the `tryRefl` variation between the two. Part of #3983
github-actions
bot
added
the
toolchain-available
leanprover-community-mathlib4-bot
added a commit
to leanprover-community/batteries
that referenced
this pull request
Aug 15, 2024
leanprover-community-mathlib4-bot
added a commit
to leanprover-community/mathlib4
that referenced
this pull request
Aug 15, 2024
leanprover-community-mathlib4-bot
added a commit
to leanprover-community/batteries
that referenced
this pull request
Aug 15, 2024
leanprover-community-mathlib4-bot
added a commit
to leanprover-community/mathlib4
that referenced
this pull request
Aug 15, 2024
|
Mathlib CI status (docs):
|
leanprover-community-mathlib4-bot
added
the
builds-mathlib
|
This was easier than expected. |
nomeata
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Aug 22, 2024
This is part of #3983. After #4154 introduced equational lemmas for non-recursive functions and #5055 unififed the lemmas for structural and wf recursive funcitons, this now disables the special handling of recursive functions in `findMatchToSplit?`, so that the equational lemmas should be the same no matter how the function was defined. The new option `eqns.deepRecursiveSplit` can be disabled to get the old behavior. This can break existing code, as there now can be extra equational lemmas: * Explicit uses of `f.eq_2` might have to be adjusted if the numbering changed. * Uses of `rw [f]` or `simp [f]` may no longer apply if they previously matched (and introduced a `match` statement), when the equational lemmas got more fine-grained. In this case either case analysis on the parameters before rewriting helps, or setting the option `opt.deepRecursiveSplit false` while defining the function
github-merge-queue bot
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Aug 25, 2024
#5129) This is part of #3983. After #4154 introduced equational lemmas for non-recursive functions and #5055 unififed the lemmas for structural and wf recursive funcitons, this now disables the special handling of recursive functions in `findMatchToSplit?`, so that the equational lemmas should be the same no matter how the function was defined. The new option `eqns.deepRecursiveSplit` can be disabled to get the old behavior. ### Breaking change This can break existing code, as there now can be extra equational lemmas: * Explicit uses of `f.eq_2` might have to be adjusted if the numbering changed. * Uses of `rw [f]` or `simp [f]` may no longer apply if they previously matched (and introduced a `match` statement), when the equational lemmas got more fine-grained. In this case either case analysis on the parameters before rewriting helps, or setting the option `opt.deepRecursiveSplit false` while defining the function
tobiasgrosser
pushed a commit
to opencompl/lean4
that referenced
this pull request
Aug 26, 2024
leanprover#5129) This is part of leanprover#3983. After leanprover#4154 introduced equational lemmas for non-recursive functions and leanprover#5055 unififed the lemmas for structural and wf recursive funcitons, this now disables the special handling of recursive functions in `findMatchToSplit?`, so that the equational lemmas should be the same no matter how the function was defined. The new option `eqns.deepRecursiveSplit` can be disabled to get the old behavior. ### Breaking change This can break existing code, as there now can be extra equational lemmas: * Explicit uses of `f.eq_2` might have to be adjusted if the numbering changed. * Uses of `rw [f]` or `simp [f]` may no longer apply if they previously matched (and introduced a `match` statement), when the equational lemmas got more fine-grained. In this case either case analysis on the parameters before rewriting helps, or setting the option `opt.deepRecursiveSplit false` while defining the function
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
by removing the
tryReflvariation between the two.Part of #3983