alternate proof for add_right_eq_self
#64
Merged
Conversation
This file contains 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
joneugster
reviewed
Jun 13, 2024
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I'll leave that to @kbuzzard, if he think's dropping proof formatting (\.) here as a side note, then that might be a valid decision too.
Using exact _ instead of assumption is for sure the corrwct thing. Thanks for the PR!
|
Thanks again for the PR! Since the game author seems busy, I just merge this... |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
The second proof proposed for
add_right_eq_selfdoes not work because theassumptiontactic is not available (and has not been introduced in the text). Also the dots seem to cause problems... Here is an alternate proof that works and which is written in the same style as in the rest of the game (no dots for subgoals, useexactrather thanassumption).