Conversation
|
In what sense is the definition of |
|
Yea, sorry. The category.assoc problem was me being braindead. There does seem to be a divergence in how |
|
Re: 4. Please use (Err, this is broken, see https://leanprover.zulipchat.com/#narrow/stream/270676-lean4/topic/hygiene.20question.3F/near/313556764. Hopefully fixed soon.) Edit: fixed in #825. |
|
Okay, I think we are down to just one issue: Options:
Option 2. seems fine to me; it's effectively what we were doing previously via |
|
This PR/issue depends on:
|
|
bors merge |
Regenerated from the [port status wiki page](https://github.com/leanprover-community/mathlib/wiki/mathlib4-port-status). Relates to the following PRs: * `algebra.divisibility.basic`: leanprover-community/mathlib4#833 * `algebra.group.with_one.defs`: leanprover-community/mathlib4#841 * `algebra.hom.commute`: leanprover-community/mathlib4#831 * `algebra.hom.group`: leanprover-community/mathlib4#659 * `algebra.hom.units`: leanprover-community/mathlib4#745 * `algebra.ring.basic`: leanprover-community/mathlib4#830 * `category_theory.natural_isomorphism`: leanprover-community/mathlib4#820 * `combinatorics.quiver.connected_component`: leanprover-community/mathlib4#836 * `combinatorics.quiver.subquiver`: leanprover-community/mathlib4#828 Co-authored-by: Johan Commelin <johan@commelin.net>
mathlib SHA: 6eb334bd8f3433d5b08ba156b8ec3e6af47e1904
Porting Notes:
1.category.associsn't able to be used in rewrites or simps. It has a more general type than in mathlib3 which may be causing issues.2.
Iso.inv_hom_id_app_assocandIso.inv_hom_id_assocgenerated byreassochas a different type than in mathlib34.
aesopfails to provehom_inv_idandinv_hom_idin the definition ofofComponents. This is likely due toaesopnot usingextlemmas.