-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 38
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
Fix terminology in L02rw.lean #81
base: main
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Conversation
After reading this another time, perhaps the best would just be to say "We do this in Lean by rewriting the proof, using the rw tactic.", since we are not rewriting |
Co-authored-by: Jon Eugster <[email protected]>
@@ -164,7 +164,7 @@ your list of assumptions. Lean thinks of `h` as being a secret proof of the | |||
assumption, rather like `x` is a secret number. | |||
|
|||
Before we can use `rfl`, we have to \"substitute in for $y$\". | |||
We do this in Lean by *rewriting* the assumption `h`, | |||
We do this in Lean by *rewriting* the proof with `h`, |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
We do this in Lean by *rewriting* the proof with `h`, | |
We do this in Lean by *rewriting* `h`, |
How about that? Although I feel like I now want to change it back to "rewriting the assumption h
".
The point is that the rw
tactic eats a list of assumptions, and it rewrites them, so "rewriting the assumption h
" sounds completely accurate to me.
@kbuzzard @joneugster thanks for both of your reviews. I see that we haven't come to a consensus yet. However, due to the way GitHub creates a separate thread for each review, I suggest that we discuss the wording in this main thread to make the discussion easier to follow. From my understanding (and correct me if this is inaccurate), in Lean we start by stating a goal as a statement and transform this goal into a new statement each time we use a tactic. This then becomes our new current goal. We stop when we reach the statement "true" which indicates that we've accomplished our goal. The whole process, including all the intermediary goals, constitutes the proof. Hence, when we use the rewrite tactic with the assumption - We do this in Lean by *rewriting* the proof `h`, [...]
+ We do this in Lean by *rewriting* the goal with `h`, [...] This wording makes it clear to me that we are rewriting the goal and not the entire proof nor Let me know if this works and I'll make the change. I see that there is also some files in the |
This pull request includes a small change to the
Game/Levels/Tutorial/L02rw.lean
file. The change clarifies the language by replacing "proof" with "assumption" in the context of rewriting with therw
tactic.