Don't count pool deposits when reregistering pools #973
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
facundominguez
commented
Oct 31, 2025
Comment on lines
139
to
142
| open import Relation.Binary.Reasoning.PartialOrder ⊆-Poset | ||
| open import Relation.Binary.Structures using (IsEquivalence) | ||
| module ≡ᵉA = IsEquivalence (≡ᵉ-isEquivalence {A = A}) | ||
| open import Relation.Binary.Reasoning.Syntax | ||
| open ⊆-syntax _IsRelatedTo_ _IsRelatedTo_ ≤-go public |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The setup is longer than the proof. Maybe we should create a module
Axiom.Set.Reasoning to reexport these?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Another option is just to use the same style as in the proofs below:
dom∪ˡˡ a∈ = begin→ a∈ $
a ∈ dom (m ˢ) →⟨ ∪-⊆ˡ ⟩
a ∈ dom (m ˢ) ∪ dom (rhs-∪ˡ ˢ) →⟨ proj₂ dom∪ ⟩
a ∈ dom ((m ˢ) ∪ (rhs-∪ˡ ˢ)) →⟨ id ⟩
a ∈ dom ((m ∪ˡ m') ˢ)
∎→There was a problem hiding this comment.
In the latest version I rewrote this with Function.Reasoning._|>_:. Thanks to @javierdiaz72 for pointing it.
@WhatisRT suggested using EquivalenceReasoning from Function.Related.Propositional, but I couldn't figure out how to use it with implication yet.
dom∪ˡˡ {a} a∈ = a∈ |> id ∶
a ∈ dom (m ˢ) |> ∪-⊆ˡ ∶
a ∈ dom (m ˢ) ∪ dom (rhs-∪ˡ ˢ) |> proj₂ dom∪ ∶
a ∈ dom ((m ˢ) ∪ (rhs-∪ˡ ˢ)) |> id ∶
a ∈ dom ((m ∪ˡ m') ˢ)
facundominguez
commented
Oct 31, 2025
Comment on lines
145
to
153
| _∎→ : ∀ (A : Type) → A → A | ||
| A ∎→ = id | ||
| infix 3 _∎→ | ||
| _→⟨_⟩_ : ∀ (x : Type) {y z : Type} → (x → y) → (y → z) → x → z | ||
| _ →⟨ f ⟩ g = g ∘ f | ||
| infixr 2 _→⟨_⟩_ | ||
| begin→ : ∀ {A B : Type} → A → (A → B) → B | ||
| begin→ a f = f a |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
These are used in the proofs below. Do they belong here or in some more general place?
facundominguez
force-pushed
the
fd/reregistration-deposits
branch
2 times, most recently
from
80a957a to
8f29a25
Compare
Reducing the scope of the equation in which POOLREAP is pattern matched reduces type checking time an order of magnitude.
facundominguez
force-pushed
the
fd/reregistration-deposits
branch
from
8f29a25 to
7a868c3
Compare
facundominguez
force-pushed
the
fd/reregistration-deposits
branch
from
2163de1 to
edb257b
Compare
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 PR modifies updates
updateCertDepositsso pool deposits are not counted again when reregistering a pool. This is the function used by the UTXO rule to update deposits.The change to the function is fairly simple, but then there are a few broken proofs that are fixed in later commits.