-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 45
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Trying to generalize mfun, updated #1256
Conversation
2c8cb96
to
95d7428
Compare
@CohenCyril this seems to actually generalize |
the remaining problem is to generalize the instance of Context {d} {aT : sigmaRingType d} {rT : realType}.
Let cst_mfun_subproof x : @measurable_fun d _ aT rT [set: aT] (cst x).
Proof. by []. Qed.
HB.instance Definition _ x := isMeasurableFun.Build d _ aT rT (cst x)
(@cst_mfun_subproof x). |
What is the issue exactly? The preimage of any set by a constant function should be measurable (because either set0 or setT) |
Of course generalizing |
@CohenCyril The last commit is generalizing the |
This is what I advocated, but I think it is a bit too hackish, we must fix hb instead. |
Great! In the meantime, should we try to merge this hack (in a more proper form and clearly marked as a hack of course)? In particular, the generalization of |
6b257ec
to
a01743c
Compare
CI is ok, the kludge is well-localized and documented, plus this will serve as a test bed for the forthcoming coding sprint, I can maybe interpret your thumb up @CohenCyril as an OK to merge? |
Motivation for this change
fixes #662
closes #672
Checklist
CHANGELOG_UNRELEASED.md
Reminder to reviewers