You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
This was raised in the discussion of #18092 but has been around for a long time:
We currently have the Algebra R A typeclass for commutative algebras that carries an inclusion map algebraMap : R -> A. We can also express non-commutative algebras using a combination of other typeclasses, but then the inclusion becomes a derived definition (for example, as (· • 1)). For better defeqs, if not simply mirroring actual mathematical practice, we should instead have a typeclass for non-commutative algebras that carries the inclusion map.
And in turn we should try to generalize this to canonical inclusions of groups etc.
When this issue is resolved:, it should be possible to revert the following definitions:
This was raised in the discussion of #18092 but has been around for a long time:
We currently have the
Algebra R A
typeclass for commutative algebras that carries an inclusion mapalgebraMap : R -> A
. We can also express non-commutative algebras using a combination of other typeclasses, but then the inclusion becomes a derived definition (for example, as(· • 1)
). For better defeqs, if not simply mirroring actual mathematical practice, we should instead have a typeclass for non-commutative algebras that carries the inclusion map.And in turn we should try to generalize this to canonical inclusions of groups etc.
When this issue is resolved:, it should be possible to revert the following definitions:
1 : Submodule R A
changes back from(· • 1)
toLinearMap.range (Algebra.linearMap R A)
. (See [Merged by Bors] - refactor: change the definition of1 : Submodule R A
to the range of(· • 1)
#18092.)The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: