This PR verifies the `insertMany` method on `HashMap`s for the special
case of inserting lists.
---------
Co-authored-by: jt0202 <johannes.tantow@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: monsterkrampe <monsterkrampe@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: Johannes Tantow <44068763+jt0202@users.noreply.github.com>
This PR replaces the existing implementations of `(D)HashMap.alter` and
`(D)HashMap.modify` with primitive, more efficient ones and in
particular provides proofs that they yield well-formed hash maps (`WF`
typeclass).
---------
Co-authored-by: Paul Reichert <6992158+datokrat@users.noreply.github.com>
This PR changes the definition of `HashSet.insertMany` and
`HashSet.Raw.insertMany` so that it is equivalent to repeatedly calling
`HashSet.insert`/`HashSet.Raw.insert`. It also clarifies the docstrings
of all the `insert` and `insertMany` functions.
---------
Co-authored-by: Kim Morrison <scott.morrison@gmail.com>
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>
These implementations could be made more efficient by promoting them to
primitive operations, but I propose installing these in the meantime to
encourage users to avoid non-linearity problems.
We swap the arguments for `Membership.mem` so that when proceeded by a
`SetLike` coercion, as is often the case in Mathlib, the resulting
expression is recognized as eta expanded and reduce for many
computations. The most beneficial outcome is that the discrimination
tree keys for instances and simp lemmas concerning subsets become more
robust resulting in more efficient searches.
Closes `RFC` #4932
---------
Co-authored-by: Kim Morrison <kim@tqft.net>
Co-authored-by: Henrik Böving <hargonix@gmail.com>
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
