Closed avekens closed 4 months ago
What do you think about the -aryF
idea (above)?
(if you're asking me, it's a great idea)
It's actually an interesting idea to call the class -aryF, so that we will have ( N-aryF X )
for N-ary endofunctions over X.
I wonder, however, if I have to rewrite all proofs manually, or if there is an automatism which does (most of) the work. Meanwhile, I propose to leave the definition unchanged for the moment (and to merge this PR), and to open an issue for the change of the symbol.
Globally replacing the math token NaryF
by -aryF
using any text editor should basically do the trick.
Globally replacing the math token
NaryF
by-aryF
using any text editor should basically do the trick.
but we have to switch the operands: ( X NaryF N )
=> ( N -aryF X )
.
Oh yes, you're right, it's not that trivial. No problem for me to merge as-is, I already approved.
Since issue #4035 is opened for changing the symbol and order of operands, this PR can be merged now.
I'm late to the party, but yes, glad it's merged. We can discuss swapping the order in https://github.com/metamath/set.mm/issues/4035
The new HTML representation of nary functions really looks nice: (1-aryF 𝑋)
I wonder, however, if somebody gets confused and asks where the symbols 0-aryF, 1-aryF, 2-aryF and N-aryF are defined (and what the meaning of ( C X )
would be)...
I guess a comment could be added to df-naryf explaining that unlike most operators, the display for -aryF
only has a space on the right hand side. Internally it is still ~ co , i.e. three classes in a row surrounded by parentheses
continuation of #3997:
.