[Merged by Bors] - chore: split WithLp.equiv into a new pair WithLp.toLp/WithLp.ofLp#26459
[Merged by Bors] - chore: split WithLp.equiv into a new pair WithLp.toLp/WithLp.ofLp#26459eric-wieser wants to merge 33 commits intomasterfrom
WithLp.equiv into a new pair WithLp.toLp/WithLp.ofLp#26459Conversation
Co-authored-by: EtienneC30 <66847262+EtienneC30@users.noreply.github.com>
…unity/mathlib4 into with-lp-refactor
PR summary 508c1928c2Import changes for modified filesNo significant changes to the import graph Import changes for all files
|
Co-authored-by: Yaël Dillies <yael.dillies@gmail.com>
|
Thanks! For me it's good to go. |
|
🚀 Pull request has been placed on the maintainer queue by EtienneC30. |
|
Thanks! bors merge |
…p` (#26459) `(WithLp.equiv p _).symm v` is very inconvenient as a normal form when working with `WithLp`. This introduces `WithLp.toLp p v` as the simp-normal spelling of this operation, and `v'.ofLp` as the simp-normal spelling of `WithLp.equiv p _ v'`. It then deprecates almost all the lemmas about `WithLp.equiv`, as these are no longer stated in simp-normal form. The motivation for making `toLp` and `ofLp` as plain functions, as opposed to `Equiv`s, is to permit them to be later adapted into a constructor and projection of a one-field structure. Almost nothing in mathlib needs them to be equivs anyway. Zulip thread: [#mathlib4 > defeq abuse in `WithLp` @ 💬](https://leanprover.zulipchat.com/#narrow/channel/287929-mathlib4/topic/defeq.20abuse.20in.20.60WithLp.60/near/516241777) Co-authored-by: Yael Dillies <yael.dillies@gmail.com> Co-authored-by: Paul Lezeau <paul.lezeau@gmail.com> Co-authored-by: Yaël Dillies <yael.dillies@gmail.com>
|
Pull request successfully merged into master. Build succeeded: |
WithLp.equiv into a new pair WithLp.toLp/WithLp.ofLpWithLp.equiv into a new pair WithLp.toLp/WithLp.ofLp
This reverts commit 2da1569.
…p` (leanprover-community#26459) `(WithLp.equiv p _).symm v` is very inconvenient as a normal form when working with `WithLp`. This introduces `WithLp.toLp p v` as the simp-normal spelling of this operation, and `v'.ofLp` as the simp-normal spelling of `WithLp.equiv p _ v'`. It then deprecates almost all the lemmas about `WithLp.equiv`, as these are no longer stated in simp-normal form. The motivation for making `toLp` and `ofLp` as plain functions, as opposed to `Equiv`s, is to permit them to be later adapted into a constructor and projection of a one-field structure. Almost nothing in mathlib needs them to be equivs anyway. Zulip thread: [#mathlib4 > defeq abuse in &leanprover-community#96;WithLp&leanprover-community#96; @ 💬](https://leanprover.zulipchat.com/#narrow/channel/287929-mathlib4/topic/defeq.20abuse.20in.20.60WithLp.60/near/516241777) Co-authored-by: Yael Dillies <yael.dillies@gmail.com> Co-authored-by: Paul Lezeau <paul.lezeau@gmail.com> Co-authored-by: Yaël Dillies <yael.dillies@gmail.com>
…p` (leanprover-community#26459) `(WithLp.equiv p _).symm v` is very inconvenient as a normal form when working with `WithLp`. This introduces `WithLp.toLp p v` as the simp-normal spelling of this operation, and `v'.ofLp` as the simp-normal spelling of `WithLp.equiv p _ v'`. It then deprecates almost all the lemmas about `WithLp.equiv`, as these are no longer stated in simp-normal form. The motivation for making `toLp` and `ofLp` as plain functions, as opposed to `Equiv`s, is to permit them to be later adapted into a constructor and projection of a one-field structure. Almost nothing in mathlib needs them to be equivs anyway. Zulip thread: [#mathlib4 > defeq abuse in &leanprover-community#96;WithLp&leanprover-community#96; @ 💬](https://leanprover.zulipchat.com/#narrow/channel/287929-mathlib4/topic/defeq.20abuse.20in.20.60WithLp.60/near/516241777) Co-authored-by: Yael Dillies <yael.dillies@gmail.com> Co-authored-by: Paul Lezeau <paul.lezeau@gmail.com> Co-authored-by: Yaël Dillies <yael.dillies@gmail.com>
…p` (leanprover-community#26459) `(WithLp.equiv p _).symm v` is very inconvenient as a normal form when working with `WithLp`. This introduces `WithLp.toLp p v` as the simp-normal spelling of this operation, and `v'.ofLp` as the simp-normal spelling of `WithLp.equiv p _ v'`. It then deprecates almost all the lemmas about `WithLp.equiv`, as these are no longer stated in simp-normal form. The motivation for making `toLp` and `ofLp` as plain functions, as opposed to `Equiv`s, is to permit them to be later adapted into a constructor and projection of a one-field structure. Almost nothing in mathlib needs them to be equivs anyway. Zulip thread: [#mathlib4 > defeq abuse in &leanprover-community#96;WithLp&leanprover-community#96; @ 💬](https://leanprover.zulipchat.com/#narrow/channel/287929-mathlib4/topic/defeq.20abuse.20in.20.60WithLp.60/near/516241777) Co-authored-by: Yael Dillies <yael.dillies@gmail.com> Co-authored-by: Paul Lezeau <paul.lezeau@gmail.com> Co-authored-by: Yaël Dillies <yael.dillies@gmail.com>
(WithLp.equiv p _).symm vis very inconvenient as a normal form when working withWithLp.This introduces
WithLp.toLp p vas the simp-normal spelling of this operation, andv'.ofLpas the simp-normal spelling ofWithLp.equiv p _ v'. It then deprecates almost all the lemmas aboutWithLp.equiv, as these are no longer stated in simp-normal form.The motivation for making
toLpandofLpas plain functions, as opposed toEquivs, is to permit them to be later adapted into a constructor and projection of a one-field structure. Almost nothing in mathlib needs them to be equivs anyway.Zulip thread: #mathlib4 > defeq abuse in `WithLp` @ 💬
Co-authored-by: Yael Dillies yael.dillies@gmail.com
Co-authored-by: Paul Lezeau paul.lezeau@gmail.com
Alternative to #24261, which makes
toLpandofLpplain functions, and does not touch any of the existingequivs beside making them not simp-normal.