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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom

df-cdeq #4158

Open
icecream17 opened this issue Aug 23, 2024 · 1 comment · May be fixed by #4251
Open

df-cdeq #4158

icecream17 opened this issue Aug 23, 2024 · 1 comment · May be fixed by #4251

Comments

@icecream17
Copy link
Contributor

https://us.metamath.org/mpeuni/df-cdeq.html

Would it also work to prove the syntax theorem, i.e. ccdeq would have three f-hypotheses (vx vy wph) and show wi((weq cv(vx) cv(vy)) wph)? That would seem to flatten the syntax structure equivalently
@benjub
Copy link
Contributor

benjub commented Aug 23, 2024

We could, but syntax theorems do not shorten later proofs, unless they are special instances, see https://us.metamath.org/mpeuni/bj-1.html

By the way, it was not agreed to move https://us.metamath.org/mpeuni/bj-0.html and https://us.metamath.org/mpeuni/bj-1.html to the main section, even as examples.

@icecream17 icecream17 linked a pull request Sep 27, 2024 that will close this issue
Open
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

sn-wcdeq, 19.8aw icecream17/set.mm
2 participants
@benjub @icecream17