This PR changes the signature of `Array.get` to take a Nat and a proof,
rather than a `Fin`, for consistency with the rest of the (planned)
Array API. Note that because of bootstrapping issues we can't provide
`get_elem_tactic` as an autoparameter for the proof. As users will
mostly use the `xs[i]` notation provided by `GetElem`, this hopefully
isn't a problem.
We may restore `Fin` based versions, either here or downstream, as
needed, but they won't be the "main" functions.
---------
Co-authored-by: David Thrane Christiansen <david@davidchristiansen.dk>
This PR changes the signature of `Array.set` to take a `Nat`, and a
tactic-provided bound, rather than a `Fin`.
Corresponding changes (but without the auto-param) for `Array.get` will
arrive shortly, after which I'll go more pervasively through the Array
API.
This PR verifies the `keys` function on `Std.HashMap`.
---
Initial discussions have already happend with @TwoFX and we are
collaborating on this matter.
This will remain a draft as long as not all desired results have been
added.
If we should still create an issue for the topic of this PR, let us
know.
Of course, any other feedback is appreciated as well :)
---------
Co-authored-by: Markus Himmel <markus@lean-fro.org>
Co-authored-by: monsterkrampe <monsterkrampe@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: jt0202 <johannes.tantow@gmail.com>
I made a few choices so far that can probably be discussed:
- got rid of `modn` on `UInt`, nobody seems to use it apart from the
definition of `shift` which can use normal `mod`
- removed the previous defeq optimized definition of `USize.size` in
favor for a normal one. The motivation was to allow `OfNat` to work
which doesn't seem to be necessary anymore afaict.
- Minimized uses of `.val`, should we maybe mark it deprecated?
- Mostly got rid of `.val` in basically all theorems as the proper next
level of API would now be `.toBitVec`. We could probably re-prove them
but it would be more annoying given the change of definition.
- Did not yet redefine `log2` in terms of `BitVec` as this would require
a `log2` in `BitVec` as well, do we want this?
- I added a couple of theorems around the relation of `<` on `UInt` and
`Nat`. These were previously not needed because defeq was used all over
the place to save us. I did not yet generalize these to all types as I
wasn't sure if they are the appropriate lemma that we want to have.
The original idea was to use `bif` in computation contexts and `if` in
propositional contexts, but this turned out to be really inconvenient in
practice.
The name `remove` was chosen because it is more popular in mainstream
programming languages, but being consistent with other Lean container
types (including `Lean.HashMap` and `Batteries.HashMap`) is more
important, so let's change the name while we still can.
### Preliminary PRs:
- [x] #4597
- [x] #4599
- [x] #4600
- [x] #4602
- [x] #4603
- [x] #4604
- [x] #4605
- [x] #4607
- [x] #4627
- [x] #4629
### Quick overview over API/naming changes compared to `Lean.HashMap`
and `Batteries.HashMap`:
#### Lean
* `find?` -> `get?`/`getElem?`
* `find!` -> `get!`/`gtetElem!`
* `findD` -> `getD`
* `findEntry?` -> not implemented for now
* `insert'` -> `containsThenInsert` (order reversed in result)
* `insertIfNew` -> `getThenInsertIfNew?` (order reversed in result)
* `numBuckets` -> `Internal.numBuckets`
* `ofListWith` -> not implemented for now
* `Array.groupByKey` -> not implemented for now
* `merge` -> not implemented for now, but you can use `insertMany`
#### Batteries
* `modify` -> not implemented for now
* `mergeWith` -> not implemented for now
* `mergeWithM` -> not implemented for now
