Merged
Conversation
This adds a simplification lemma for `(x - y).toNat` when the subtraction is known to not overflow (i.e., `y ≤ x`).
github-actions
bot
added
the
toolchain-available
|
Mathlib CI status (docs):
|
tobiasgrosser
pushed a commit
to opencompl/lean4
that referenced
this pull request
Sep 16, 2024
This adds a simplification lemma for `(x - y).toNat` when the subtraction is known to not overflow (i.e., `y ≤ x`). We make a new section for this for two reasons: 1. Definitions of subtraction occur before the definition of `BitVec.le_def`, so we cannot directly place this lemma at `sub`. 2. There are other theorems of this kind, for addition and multiplication, which can morally live in the same section.
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
2 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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be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.
This adds a simplification lemma for
(x - y).toNatwhen the subtraction is known to not overflow (i.e.,y ≤ x).We make a new section for this for two reasons:
BitVec.le_def, so we cannot directly place this lemma atsub.