This PR uniformizes the naming of `enum`/`enumFrom` (on `List`) and
`zipWithIndex` (on `Array` on `Vector`), replacing all with `zipIdx`. At
the same time, we generalize to add an optional `Nat` parameter for the
initial value of the index (which previously existed, only for `List`,
as the separate function `enumFrom`).
This PR deprecates `List.iota`, which we make no essential use of. `iota
n` can be replaced with `(range' 1 n).reverse`. The verification lemmas
for `range'` already have better coverage than those for `iota`.
Any downstream projects using it (I am not aware of any) are encouraged
to adopt it.
This PR defines `Vector.flatMap`, changes the order of arguments in
`List.flatMap` for consistency, and aligns the lemmas for
`List`/`Array`/`Vector` `flatMap`.
This PR replaces `List.lt` with `List.Lex`, from Mathlib, and adds the
new `Bool` valued lexicographic comparatory function `List.lex`. This
subtly changes the definition of `<` on Lists in some situations.
`List.lt` was a weaker relation: in particular if `l₁ < l₂`, then
`a :: l₁ < b :: l₂` may hold according to `List.lt` even if `a` and `b`
are merely incomparable
(either neither `a < b` nor `b < a`), whereas according to `List.Lex`
this would require `a = b`.
When `<` is total, in the sense that `¬ · < ·` is antisymmetric, then
the two relations coincide.
Mathlib was already overriding the order instances for `List α`,
so this change should not be noticed by anyone already using Mathlib.
We simultaneously add the boolean valued `List.lex` function,
parameterised by a `BEq` typeclass
and an arbitrary `lt` function. This will support the flexibility
previously provided for `List.lt`,
via a `==` function which is weaker than strict equality.
This PR makes stricter requirements for the `@[deprecated]` attribute,
requiring either a replacement identifier as `@[deprecated bar]` or
suggestion text `@[deprecated "Past its use by date"]`, and also
requires a `since := "..."` field.
We add some documentation explaining the auxiliary function in the
definition of `groupBy`. This has been moved here from Mathlib PR
[16818](https://github.com/leanprover-community/mathlib4/pull/16818) by
request of @semorrison.
---------
Co-authored-by: Kim Morrison <kim@tqft.net>
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>
Defines `mergeSort`, a naive stable merge sort algorithm, replaces it
via a `@[csimp]` lemma with something faster at runtime, and proves the
following results:
* `mergeSort_sorted`: `mergeSort` produces a sorted list.
* `mergeSort_perm`: `mergeSort` is a permutation of the input list.
* `mergeSort_of_sorted`: `mergeSort` does not change a sorted list.
* `mergeSort_cons`: proves `mergeSort le (x :: xs) = l₁ ++ x :: l₂` for
some `l₁, l₂`
so that `mergeSort le xs = l₁ ++ l₂`, and no `a ∈ l₁` satisfies `le a
x`.
* `mergeSort_stable`: if `c` is a sorted sublist of `l`, then `c` is
still a sublist of `mergeSort le l`.
Upstreaming of basic material on `List.Pairwise` and `List.Nodup`. More
complete API to follow later, this is just a first approximation of what
leansat will need.
I'll update `list_simp.lean` (simp normal form testing) and add missing
lemmas in follow-up PRs.
This just upstreams the material, and reorders the lemmas to match the
other sections.
This is not the most exciting place to start, but I started here to:
* pick a function with little development in Batteries and Mathlib, so I
wouldn't have conflicts
* that is easy!
* to see how much effort it is to get fairly complete coverage
* and to set up some infrastructure to be used later, i.e.
`tests/lean/run/list_simp.lean`
This PR neither adds nor removes material, but improves the organization
of `Init/Data/List/*`.
These files are essentially completely re-ordered, to ensure that
material is developed in a consistent order between `List.Basic`,
`List.Impl`, `List.BasicAux`, and `List.Lemmas`.
Everything is organised in subsections, and I've added some module docs.
We recently discovered inconsistencies in Mathlib and Std over the
ordering of the arguments for `==`.
The most common usage puts the "more variable" term on the LHS, and the
"more constant" term on the RHS, however there are plenty of exceptions,
and they cause unnecessary pain when switching (particularly, sometimes
requiring otherwise unneeded `LawfulBEq` hypotheses).
This convention is consistent with the (obvious) preference for `x == 0`
over `0 == x` when one term is a literal.
We recently updated Std to use this convention
https://github.com/leanprover/std4/pull/430
This PR changes the two major places in Lean that use the opposite
convention, and adds a suggestion to the docstring for `BEq` about the
preferred convention.
Previously the `ac_rfl` tactic was only really usable when depending on
mathlib. With these instances, `ac_rfl` can deal with the various
operations defined in Lean.
---------
Co-authored-by: Scott Morrison <scott.morrison@gmail.com>
This makes changes to the `GetElem` class so that it does not lead to
unnecessary overhead in container like `RBMap`.
The changes are to:
1. Make `getElem?` and `getElem!` part of the `GetElem` class so they
can be overridden in instances.
2. Introduce a `LawfulGetElem` class that contains correctness theorems
for `getElem?` and `getElem!` using the original definitions.
3. Reorganize definitions (e.g, by moving `GetElem` out of
`Init.Prelude`) so that the `GetElem` changes are feasible.
4. Provide `LawfulGetElem` instances to complement all existing
`GetElem` instances in Lean core.
To reduce the size of the PR, this doesn't do the work of providing new
`GetElem` instances for `RBMap`, `HashMap` etc. That will be done in a
separate PR (#3688) that depends on this.
---------
Co-authored-by: Mac Malone <tydeu@hatpress.net>
