Tools to reformulate category-theoretic axioms in a more associativity-friendly way #
The reassoc
attribute #
The reassoc
attribute can be applied to a lemma
@[reassoc]
lemma some_lemma : foo ≫ bar = baz := ...
and produce
lemma some_lemma_assoc {Y : C} (f : X ⟶ Y) : foo ≫ bar ≫ f = baz ≫ f := ...
The name of the produced lemma can be specified with @[reassoc other_lemma_name]
. If
simp
is added first, the generated lemma will also have the simp
attribute.
The reassoc_axiom
command #
When declaring a class of categories, the axioms can be reformulated to be more amenable to manipulation in right associated expressions:
class some_class (C : Type) [category C] :=
(foo : Π X : C, X ⟶ X)
(bar : ∀ {X Y : C} (f : X ⟶ Y), foo X ≫ f = f ≫ foo Y)
reassoc_axiom some_class.bar
Here too, the reassoc
attribute can be used instead. It works well when combined with
simp
:
attribute [simp, reassoc] some_class.bar
Equations
- tactic.calculated_Prop β hh = β
With h : x ≫ y ≫ z = x
(with universal quantifiers tolerated),
reassoc_of h : ∀ {X'} (f : W ⟶ X'), x ≫ y ≫ z ≫ f = x ≫ f
.
The type and proof of reassoc_of h
is generated by tactic.derive_reassoc_proof
which make reassoc_of
meta-programming adjacent. It is not called as a tactic but as
an expression. The goal is to avoid creating assumptions that are dismissed after one use:
example (X Y Z W : C) (x : X ⟶ Y) (y : Y ⟶ Z) (z z' : Z ⟶ W) (w : X ⟶ Z)
(h : x ≫ y = w)
(h' : y ≫ z = y ≫ z') :
x ≫ y ≫ z = w ≫ z' :=
begin
rw [h',reassoc_of h],
end