We can find the Fourier transform as the limit for infinite period of a Fourier series as explained in https://class.ece.uw.edu/235dl/EE235/Project/lesson15old/lesson15.html
I do the derivation they do:
$f_p$ is a $L$ periodic function. I define $$k_n = \frac{2 \pi n}{L}\qquad \text{and}\qquad c_n = \frac{1}{L} \int_{-L/2}^{L/2} f_p(x) e^{-i k_n x}~ dx$$
$$f_p(x)=\sum_{n=-\infty}^{+ \infty} c_n e^{i k_n x}$$
Now, we take the period going to infinity and define $$f(x)=\lim_{L \to + \infty} f_p(x)$$
$$\implies f(x)=\lim_{L \to + \infty} \sum_{n=-\infty}^{+ \infty} (k_{n+1}-k_n) \left( \frac{1}{2 \pi} \int_{-L/2}^{L/2}dx f_p(x) e^{-i k_n x} \right) e^{i k_n x}$$
Up to this point I totally agree and I see that $k_{n+1}-k_n=\delta k$ will play the role of the $dk$ in the integration. But this is more a "feeling" than a proof. Because they say that at this point we recognize a Riemann sum and we thus recognize the Fourier transform:
$$f(x)=\int_{-\infty}^{+ \infty} dk \left( \frac{1}{2 \pi} \int_{-\infty}^{+\infty}dx f(x) e^{-i k x} \right) e^{i k x}$$
This is what I don't understand.
From what I understood from comment on this post, it is not true "in general" but only for some "nice" functions. Indeed, for example, the definition of the integral through Riemann sum is the following:
$$ \int_a^b f(x) dx = \lim_{N \to +\infty} \sum_{n=0}^N \frac{(b-a)}{N} f(a + (b-a)\frac{n}{N})$$
But putting both $a$ and $b$ going to $+ \infty$ and $- \infty$ respectively I don't find an analog expression as the infinite-period Fourier series.
My question:
I would like a proof based on the Riemann summations on which for a set of "nice" functions the equality is rigorously proved.
I tried to prove it for compact support functions but I miss something in my proof as you can see in my very last paragraph.