Skip to content
This repository was archived by the owner on Jul 24, 2024. It is now read-only.

[Merged by Bors] - feat(algebra/big_operators/finprod): add lemma finprod_mem_finset_of_product#7439

Closed
ocfnash wants to merge 14 commits intomasterfrom
finsum_finset_product
Closed

[Merged by Bors] - feat(algebra/big_operators/finprod): add lemma finprod_mem_finset_of_product#7439
ocfnash wants to merge 14 commits intomasterfrom
finsum_finset_product

Conversation

@ocfnash
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

@ocfnash ocfnash commented May 2, 2021


Related conversation on Zulip here

Open in Gitpod

@ocfnash ocfnash added the awaiting-review The author would like community review of the PR label May 2, 2021
ocfnash added a commit that referenced this pull request May 2, 2021
I'll tidy this all up after #7439 is resolved.
@ocfnash ocfnash 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 May 3, 2021
As it happens, I found it more convenient to derive this as a corollary
of `finprod_mem_finset_of_product` rather than vice-versa.
@ocfnash ocfnash force-pushed the finsum_finset_product branch from 257c0b3 to b039301 Compare May 3, 2021 16:08
@ocfnash ocfnash 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 May 3, 2021
@ocfnash ocfnash requested a review from eric-wieser May 3, 2021 17:17
ocfnash added 4 commits May 3, 2021 22:42
We have to accept one of the following compromises:
  1. Not having `simp` for `finprod_mem_mul_support`
  2. Dropping `simp` from `function.mem_mul_support`
  3. Restating `finprod_mem_mul_support` using `h : f a ≠ 1` instead of `a ∈ mul_support f`

Probably 3 is the right approach but I'd at least like to see if the changes
here are sufficient to get the build passing so I can see what 2 would look like.
Also dropping `finprod_along_mul_support` since this is now provable `by simp`.
@ocfnash ocfnash requested a review from eric-wieser May 5, 2021 10:27
ocfnash added a commit that referenced this pull request May 6, 2021
The dependence was a legacy of previous proposal.
@github-actions github-actions bot added the merge-conflict Please `git merge origin/master` then a bot will remove this label. label May 7, 2021
@github-actions github-actions bot removed the merge-conflict Please `git merge origin/master` then a bot will remove this label. label May 8, 2021
Copy link
Copy Markdown
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.

Some comments:

  • all ..._of_product names should be ..._product or ..._prod (that is the canonical name, but I guess that is confusing in this file).
  • The subscripts 2 should probably be subscripts 3, since they are about ternary functions.

@ocfnash ocfnash requested a review from fpvandoorn May 25, 2021 12:16
@fpvandoorn
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

bors merge

@github-actions github-actions bot added ready-to-merge All that is left is for bors to build and merge this PR. (Remember you need to say `bors r+`.) and removed awaiting-review The author would like community review of the PR labels May 25, 2021
bors bot pushed a commit that referenced this pull request May 25, 2021
@bors
Copy link
Copy Markdown

bors bot commented May 25, 2021

Pull request successfully merged into master.

Build succeeded:

@bors bors bot changed the title feat(algebra/big_operators/finprod): add lemma finprod_mem_finset_of_product [Merged by Bors] - feat(algebra/big_operators/finprod): add lemma finprod_mem_finset_of_product May 25, 2021
@bors bors bot closed this May 25, 2021
@bors bors bot deleted the finsum_finset_product branch May 25, 2021 23:21
YaelDillies added a commit to leanprover-community/mathlib4 that referenced this pull request Dec 9, 2023
`Function.support` is a very basic definition. Nevertheless, it is a pretty heavy import because it imports most objects a `support` lemma can be written about.

This PR reverses the dependencies between those objects and `Function.support`, so that the latter can become a much more lightweight import. Only one import could not easily be reversed, namely the one to `Data.Set.Finite`, so I created a new file instead.

I credit:
* Yury for leanprover-community/mathlib3#6791
* Oliver for leanprover-community/mathlib3#7439
mathlib-bors bot pushed a commit to leanprover-community/mathlib4 that referenced this pull request Dec 13, 2023
`Function.support` is a very basic definition. Nevertheless, it is a pretty heavy import because it imports most objects a `support` lemma can be written about.

This PR reverses the dependencies between those objects and `Function.support`, so that the latter can become a much more lightweight import.

Only two import could not easily be reversed, namely the ones to `Data.Set.Finite` and `Order.ConditionallyCompleteLattice.Basic`, so I created two new files instead.

I credit:
* Yury for leanprover-community/mathlib3#6791
* Oliver for leanprover-community/mathlib3#7439
awueth pushed a commit to leanprover-community/mathlib4 that referenced this pull request Dec 19, 2023
`Function.support` is a very basic definition. Nevertheless, it is a pretty heavy import because it imports most objects a `support` lemma can be written about.

This PR reverses the dependencies between those objects and `Function.support`, so that the latter can become a much more lightweight import.

Only two import could not easily be reversed, namely the ones to `Data.Set.Finite` and `Order.ConditionallyCompleteLattice.Basic`, so I created two new files instead.

I credit:
* Yury for leanprover-community/mathlib3#6791
* Oliver for leanprover-community/mathlib3#7439
Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.

Labels

ready-to-merge All that is left is for bors to build and merge this PR. (Remember you need to say `bors r+`.)

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants