Skip to content

[ refactor ] Data.List.Relation.Binary.Sublist.Propositional.Properties #2808

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Draft
wants to merge 2 commits into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

jamesmckinna
Copy link
Contributor

@jamesmckinna jamesmckinna commented Aug 13, 2025

See #2525 . This tackles the refactoring part, but does not resolve the duplication problem.

UPDATED: yuk... some tricky intensional equality snafus caused by the refactoring. FIXED now, but at the cost of a breaking (intensional to extensional) change...

Not only that, but attempting to deprecate anti-mono/all-anti-mono causes a dependency cycle between

  • Data.List.Relation.Unary.All.Properties
  • Data.List.Relation.Binary.Subset.Propositional.Properties

I'm tempted to suggest that we make the breaking change simply of moving the lemmas to the latter module, and marking this as non-backwards-compatible for the sake of a simpler dependency graph?

Copy link
Contributor

@JacquesCarette JacquesCarette left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I think it would make sense to separate the pure additions from the modifications into 2 PRs.

@@ -167,7 +180,7 @@ lookup-⊆-trans = Any-resp-⊆-trans
lookup-injective : ∀ {P : Pred A ℓ} {τ : xs ⊆ ys} {i j : Any P xs} →
lookup τ i ≡ lookup τ j → i ≡ j
lookup-injective {τ = _ ∷ʳ _} = lookup-injective ∘′ there-injective
lookup-injective {τ = x≡y ∷ _} {here _} {here _} = cong here ∘′ subst-injective x≡y ∘′ here-injective
lookup-injective {τ = refl ∷ _} {here _} {here _} = cong here ∘′ here-injective
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This change now makes the comment right after it not make sense?


-- All P is a contravariant functor from _⊆_ to Set.

All-resp-⊆ : (All P) Respects _⊇_
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

The name says the opposite of the property?!?!?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

The name is legacy, back-ported from Propositional. But I agree, it's maybe idiotic to have retained it.

@jamesmckinna
Copy link
Contributor Author

I think it would make sense to separate the pure additions from the modifications into 2 PRs.

Ah... yes, you're probably right. But as I comment on the original issue, it's perhaps not even obvious what the right way forward is here.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants