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

[DRY] Refactor Algebra.Solver.*Monoid (or deprecate entirely?) #2403

Open
jamesmckinna opened this issue Jun 9, 2024 · 0 comments · May be fixed by #2407
Open

[DRY] Refactor Algebra.Solver.*Monoid (or deprecate entirely?) #2403

jamesmckinna opened this issue Jun 9, 2024 · 0 comments · May be fixed by #2407

Comments

@jamesmckinna
Copy link
Contributor

jamesmckinna commented Jun 9, 2024

At present, there are 3 such modules, two of which (Commutative and IdempotentCommutative) are not yet superseded by counterparts under Tactic.*Solver (only Monoid has been reimplemented).

There is a huge amount of duplicated code between the three, which could/should be refactored into a common core, basically consisting of:

  • a FreeMonoid construction
  • the existing generic solver based on Relation.Binary.Reflection, exporting solve
  • a 'Tactic' module, exporting prove, parametrised on a suitable API Normal for normal forms

The three individual modules would then reduce entirely to their construction of a suitable implementation of the Normal API, together with appropriate public re-export of solve and prove from the (instantiated) generic constructions.

NB. Tactic.MonoidSolver also contains an implementation (a different one! the 'functorial' version of variables, rather than the Fin-based one) of the free monoid, together with its semantics via the Cayley construction, so downstream there would/should be ample opportunity to refactor that as well... at such time as we have a common implementation of FreeMonoid (cf. #1962 ) on which we can agree.

UPDATED: indeed, further downstream refactoring would be possible. Once you have a suitable API of Normal forms (parameterised by a RawMonoid M):

  • the normalise function can be expressed generically, given a rawMonoid structure on Normal forms, together with an interpretation of var
  • the correct function can be expressed generically, given a MonoidHomomorphism from Normal to M, together with the 'obvious' correctness/coherence condition on (the interpretation of) var, on the assumption that M admits IsMonoid (ie M is actually a Monoid)
  • at which point, all the additional existing machinery involving prove etc. can be folded in on top of the above two definable operations.
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

1 participant