Refactor coproduct equivalences #1137
Open
+65
−27
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
Comment on lines
+199
to
+200
| ( map-coproduct (map-equiv f) (map-equiv g)) ∘ | ||
| ( map-coproduct (map-inv-equiv f) (map-inv-equiv g)) ~ id |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Looks to me like you should define
map-equiv-coproduct = map-coproduct (map-equiv f) (map-equiv g)and
map-inv-equiv-coproduct = map-coproduct (map-inv-equiv f) (map-inv-equiv g)And then this should be
is-section map-equiv-coproduct map-inv-equiv-coproduct
Comment on lines
+216
to
+217
| ( map-coproduct (map-inv-equiv f) (map-inv-equiv g)) ∘ | ||
| ( map-coproduct (map-equiv f) (map-equiv g)) ~ id |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Same as above
is-retraction map-equiv-coproduct map-inv-equiv-coproduct| @@ -69,6 +72,29 @@ inr-coproduct-Fin k l = map-coproduct-Fin k l ∘ inr | |||
| compute-inl-coproduct-Fin : | |||
| (k : ℕ) → inl-coproduct-Fin k 0 ~ id | |||
| compute-inl-coproduct-Fin k x = refl | |||
|
|
|||
| map-Fin-add-ℕ : | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I see that the original name Fin-add-ℕ is not your fault, but having a capitalized word (Fin) before an uncapitalized one (add) is a sure sign that the naming should be improved.
I think better names for the entries in this file would be, in order,
coproduct-Fin->compute-coproduct-Finmap-coproduct-Fin->map-compute-coproduct-FinFin-add-ℕ->inv-compute-coproduct-Fin, and then please add a definition formap-inv-compute-coproduct-Fininl-coproduct-Finis fineinr-coproduct-Finis finemap-Fin-add-ℕ->map-compute-map-inv-compute-coproduct-Fin(since the maps are not definitionally the same)compute-map-Fin-add-ℕ->compute-map-inv-compute-coproduct-Fin
Could you please make these renamings as part of this pull request?
| ( map-coproduct (map-Fin-add-ℕ k l) id) | ||
|
|
||
| compute-map-Fin-add-ℕ : | ||
| (k l : ℕ) → map-equiv (Fin-add-ℕ k l) ~ map-Fin-add-ℕ k l |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
After my above suggested renamings
Suggested change
| (k l : ℕ) → map-equiv (Fin-add-ℕ k l) ~ map-Fin-add-ℕ k l | |
| (k l : ℕ) → | |
| map-inv-compute-coproduct-Fin k l ~ | |
| map-compute-map-inv-compute-coproduct-Fin k l |
|
Hey @fredrik-bakke No worries for the delay, and sorry for the delay on my end :). I'll implement these changes this weekend. |
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.
Refactors some equivalences related to coproducs and adds one new definition.
removes the abstract block around
is-equiv-coproductinfoundation.functorality-coproduct-types, thus allowingmap-inv-equiv (equiv-coproduct e e')to compute tomap-coproduct (map-inv-equiv e) (map-inv-equiv e'). We keep abstract blocks around the proof that the inverse map is a section and retractioncomputes the underlying map of the equivalence
Fin-add-ℕinunivalent-combinatorics.coproduct-types