Skip to content
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

Finish Realizability for PER #60

Merged
merged 4 commits into from
May 6, 2024
Merged

Finish Realizability for PER #60

merged 4 commits into from
May 6, 2024

Conversation

Ailrun
Copy link
Member

@Ailrun Ailrun commented May 6, 2024

Resolves #35

@Ailrun Ailrun force-pushed the pr-realizability branch from 35e3c0e to 75aaafe Compare May 6, 2024 14:17
@HuStmpHrrr
Copy link
Member

There should also be some clean up PRs. For example, per_nat_then_per_top should be placed elsewhere. If you feel that you are on fire, you could also swallow Antoine's cake if you want to @Ailrun .

@HuStmpHrrr HuStmpHrrr merged commit 97ff14d into main May 6, 2024
2 checks passed
@Ailrun
Copy link
Member Author

Ailrun commented May 6, 2024

@HuStmpHrrr Why do you think so? They are all in the similar spirit, aren't they?

FYI, in Agda proof, they are merged together into a single mutual proof (with a more complex termination order)

@Ailrun Ailrun deleted the pr-realizability branch May 6, 2024 16:13
@HuStmpHrrr
Copy link
Member

at least this lemma and var_per_bot should live in the same file.

@Ailrun
Copy link
Member Author

Ailrun commented May 6, 2024

per_..._then_per_... things are about the lattice structure of PERs given here, and var_per_bot is a different from them, at least from my point of view.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Prove the realizability lemma for the PER model
2 participants