[Merged by Bors] - feat(Positivity): add support for positivity [h₁, h₂] syntax#30388
Closed
HugLycan wants to merge 20 commits intoleanprover-community:masterfrom
Closed
[Merged by Bors] - feat(Positivity): add support for positivity [h₁, h₂] syntax#30388HugLycan wants to merge 20 commits intoleanprover-community:masterfrom
positivity [h₁, h₂] syntax#30388HugLycan wants to merge 20 commits intoleanprover-community:masterfrom
Conversation
PR summary 4e56e21745Import changes for modified filesNo significant changes to the import graph Import changes for all files
Declarations diffNo declarations were harmed in the making of this PR! 🐙 You can run this locally as follows## summary with just the declaration names:
./scripts/declarations_diff.sh <optional_commit>
## more verbose report:
./scripts/declarations_diff.sh long <optional_commit>The doc-module for No changes to technical debt.You can run this locally as
|
grunweg
reviewed
Oct 10, 2025
Contributor
grunweg
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Thank you for working on this; I have wanted this feature for a while!
It would be nice to document this a bit better, so users can learn what this does by just reading the documentation. (I'm also very curious to see how much of mathlib could be simplified with this, but that should probably happen in a separate pull request.)
…an/mathlib4 into feat/positivity-with-hyps
…an/mathlib4 into feat/positivity-with-hyps
grunweg
reviewed
Oct 10, 2025
grunweg
reviewed
Oct 10, 2025
Contributor
grunweg
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Looks good to me, with one tiny tweak. @fpvandoorn Would you like to take a final look?
Co-authored-by: Michael Rothgang <rothgang@math.uni-bonn.de>
Contributor
Author
|
-awaiting-author |
thorimur
reviewed
Oct 12, 2025
thorimur
reviewed
Oct 12, 2025
Co-authored-by: thorimur <68410468+thorimur@users.noreply.github.com>
Member
|
This looks good to me. Are you now also happy with this @thorimur? There is one deviation from your suggestion, because the bors d=thorimur |
Contributor
|
✌️ thorimur can now approve this pull request. To approve and merge a pull request, simply reply with |
thorimur
reviewed
Oct 16, 2025
thorimur
reviewed
Oct 16, 2025
Co-authored-by: Thomas R. Murrills <68410468+thorimur@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: Thomas R. Murrills <68410468+thorimur@users.noreply.github.com>
Contributor
|
Thanks again for this PR and for bearing with the changes through the review process! :) 🎉 P.S. I've edited the PR description such that the mention of the related issue is above the bors merge |
Contributor
|
Pull request successfully merged into master. Build succeeded: |
positivity [h₁, h₂] syntaxpositivity [h₁, h₂] syntax
mathlib-bors bot
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Oct 18, 2025
Since #30388, `have := foo; positivity` can be shortened to `positivity [foo]`. Make use of that when sensible. I searched for all occurrences of `have :.*\n\s*positi` (using VS Code, i.e. using `rg` internally) and inspected them manually. In a few cases, keeping the `have` separate seemed more readable to me.
Jlh18
pushed a commit
to Jlh18/mathlib4
that referenced
this pull request
Oct 24, 2025
Jlh18
pushed a commit
to Jlh18/mathlib4
that referenced
this pull request
Oct 24, 2025
…mmunity#30654) Since leanprover-community#30388, `have := foo; positivity` can be shortened to `positivity [foo]`. Make use of that when sensible. I searched for all occurrences of `have :.*\n\s*positi` (using VS Code, i.e. using `rg` internally) and inspected them manually. In a few cases, keeping the `have` separate seemed more readable to me.
BeibeiX0
pushed a commit
to BeibeiX0/mathlib4
that referenced
this pull request
Nov 7, 2025
BeibeiX0
pushed a commit
to BeibeiX0/mathlib4
that referenced
this pull request
Nov 7, 2025
…mmunity#30654) Since leanprover-community#30388, `have := foo; positivity` can be shortened to `positivity [foo]`. Make use of that when sensible. I searched for all occurrences of `have :.*\n\s*positi` (using VS Code, i.e. using `rg` internally) and inspected them manually. In a few cases, keeping the `have` separate seemed more readable to me.
mathlib-bors bot
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jan 19, 2026
This PR adds support for the `finiteness [h, h']` syntax. This can be combined with the existing versions, such as supporting aesop clauses or the `finiteness?` and `finiteness_nonterminal` variants. This allows golfing mathlib in a few places. While adding tests, we take the opportunity to also test `finiteness?` and adding aesop clauses: these were previously untested. We also improve the tactic doc-string slightly: making it fully confirm to the new style guidelines is left for a future PR. This PR is inspired by #30388.
mathlib-bors bot
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jan 19, 2026
This PR adds support for the `finiteness [h, h']` syntax. This can be combined with the existing versions, such as supporting aesop clauses or the `finiteness?` and `finiteness_nonterminal` variants. This allows golfing mathlib in a few places. While adding tests, we take the opportunity to also test `finiteness?` and adding aesop clauses: these were previously untested. We also improve the tactic doc-string slightly: making it fully confirm to the new style guidelines is left for a future PR. This PR is inspired by #30388.
mathlib-bors bot
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jan 19, 2026
This PR adds support for the `finiteness [h, h']` syntax. This can be combined with the existing versions, such as supporting aesop clauses or the `finiteness?` and `finiteness_nonterminal` variants. This allows golfing mathlib in a few places. While adding tests, we take the opportunity to also test `finiteness?` and adding aesop clauses: these were previously untested. We also improve the tactic doc-string slightly: making it fully confirm to the new style guidelines is left for a future PR. This PR is inspired by #30388.
goliath-klein
pushed a commit
to PrParadoxy/mathlib4
that referenced
this pull request
Jan 24, 2026
…munity#34039) This PR adds support for the `finiteness [h, h']` syntax. This can be combined with the existing versions, such as supporting aesop clauses or the `finiteness?` and `finiteness_nonterminal` variants. This allows golfing mathlib in a few places. While adding tests, we take the opportunity to also test `finiteness?` and adding aesop clauses: these were previously untested. We also improve the tactic doc-string slightly: making it fully confirm to the new style guidelines is left for a future PR. This PR is inspired by leanprover-community#30388.
This file contains hidden or 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
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
4 participants
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.
Related issue: #2427
This PR adds support for
positivity [h₁, h₂]syntax.@fpvandoorn