[ refactor ] introduce revised notation for decidability of Lexicographic orderings, plus knock-ons#2963
Draft
jamesmckinna wants to merge 7 commits intoagda:masterfrom
Draft
[ refactor ] introduce revised notation for decidability of Lexicographic orderings, plus knock-ons#2963jamesmckinna wants to merge 7 commits intoagda:masterfrom
Lexicographic orderings, plus knock-ons#2963jamesmckinna wants to merge 7 commits intoagda:masterfrom
Conversation
JacquesCarette
requested changes
Mar 15, 2026
JacquesCarette
approved these changes
Mar 18, 2026
Collaborator
Author
|
Damn! Screwed up the merge conflict resolution... NOPE seems to have worked just fine!? |
gallais
reviewed
Apr 8, 2026
|
|
||
| <-decidable : Decidable _≈_ → Decidable _≼_ → Decidable _<_ | ||
| <-decidable _≟_ _≼?_ = | ||
| _<?_ : Decidable _≈_ → Decidable _≼_ → Decidable _<_ |
Member
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Is it not perverse to have a binary infix notation that takes 4 arguments?
It'd be a lot easier to use if packaged in a Decision module parametrised by
Decidable _≈_ and Decidable _≼_ as that would allow you to open it applied
and then use the decision procedures in an infix manner.
Collaborator
Author
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Hmmm, perhaps you're right, except that two of the arguments are implicit?
Member
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think Decidable as the return type does mean we are taking two extra arguments
This file contains hidden or 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
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
4 participants
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be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.
Last item (for now!?) on the #2846 shopping list.
UPDATED: moved to DRAFT pending definitive resolution of #2865
Usual issues, with a twist:
R?notation, against the local ofR-*style for all the other propertiesListandVecget reconciled hereLexrelations, and their proof of decidability, are ternary, so open question about what 'good'/'best' mixfix notations for such things should/could/might be deployed... suggestions belowDecordering relation structures/bundles have perhaps a sub-optimal inheritance graph?Data.Product.Relation.Binary.Pointwise.NonDependent.×-decidable#2958 so there may be merge conflicts downstream?