feat(Topology): Completely Regular Space iff Uniformizable
This PR continues the work from #24096.
Original PR: https://github.com/leanprover-community/mathlib4/pull/24096
- [x] depends on: #32140
PR summary a73de4ba4b
Import changes for modified files
No significant changes to the import graph M scripts/count-trans-deps.py M scripts/count-trans-deps.py M scripts/count-trans-deps.py
Import changes for all files
| Files | Import difference |
|---|---|
Mathlib.Topology.UniformSpace.Uniformizable (new file) |
1284 |
Declarations diff
+ IsRefl.comp
+ IsThickening
+ closure_ball_subset
+ urysohns_main
You can run this locally as follows
## summary with just the declaration names:
./scripts/declarations_diff.sh <optional_commit>
## more verbose report:
./scripts/declarations_diff.sh long <optional_commit>
The doc-module for script/declarations_diff.sh contains some details about this script.
No changes to technical debt.
You can run this locally as
./scripts/technical-debt-metrics.sh pr_summary
- The
relativevalue is the weighted sum of the differences with weight given by the inverse of the current value of the statistic. - The
absolutevalue is therelativevalue divided by the total sum of the inverses of the current values (i.e. the weighted average of the differences).
The privateModule linter not firing is hopefully fixed by #32140: let's wait for that PR to verify the fix here.
This PR/issue depends on:
- ~~leanprover-community/mathlib4#32140~~ By Dependent Issues (🤖). Happy coding!
I don't think this got addressed either:
I just realized we should replace those
Prod.mk x ⁻¹'by UniformSpace.ball. We already have UniformSpace.isOpen/Closed_ball.
I would prefer a different name for P above, even though it's private, but Aaron and Junyan disagree with me. I'd like another maintainer to decide.
maintainer merge
🚀 Pull request has been placed on the maintainer queue by j-loreaux.
Please bring the names in line with the style guide. I appreciate that the guide was written before the module system existed but until it is changed, we should continue to obey it.
Please bring the names in line with the style guide. I appreciate that the guide was written before the module system existed but until it is changed, we should continue to obey it.
I have switched out α for X. Surprisingly, I don't see any part of the naming conventions or style guideline that discourages or forbids my single letter private definition P (and I can't immediately think of what to rename it to). I don't believe urysohns_main is problematic because it is a descriptive name.