Module morphisms polymorphic in the underlying ring structure #2810
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
|
Maybe I'm missing something, but I'm not clear about the (eventual) pragmatics/uses of this design, compared with factorising any X-module morphism between
But still, documenting the rationale for the design as part of the PR documentation, if not as commentary in the files themselves, would be useful, I think. As to unsolved metas/need for explicit arguments, that seems to be a recurring problem with Agda's (weakened) mechanisms for inferring such things in the setting of the more complicate flags/modality/erasure/polarity analyses now being instrumented? |
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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 was a side-experiment in #2729 that I separated out so it could get feedback without hindering that PR. It is neither blocking nor blocked by that PR.
I'm frustrated that defining monomorphic module morphisms in terms of polymorphic ones messes with the (Agda) module parameters needed downstream. I'm not sure why they need to be made explicit