feat: further @[grind] annotations for Option
#8460
Merged
Conversation
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
kim-em
changed the title
@[grind] annotations for Option`@[grind] annotations for Option
github-actions
bot
added
the
toolchain-available
Collaborator
|
Mathlib CI status (docs):
|
auto-merge was automatically disabled
May 24, 2025 04:33
Pull Request is not mergeable
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
This PR adds further
@[grind]annotations forOption, as follow-up to the recent additions to theOptionAPI in #8379 and #8298.However, I am concurrently investigating adding
attribute [grind cases] Option, which will result in many (most?) of the annotations forOptionbeing removed again. In any case, I'm going to merge this first, as if that is viable I would like to test that most/all the lemmas now marked with@[grind]are still provable bygrind.