On Sat, Oct 14, 2017 at 10:26 PM, Waldek Hebisch
wrote:
> You write: sign(0.0) should return 0. However, this is debatable.
> At least IEEE committee decided differently.
Yes, but DoubleFloat of Spad language doesn't say it satisfies
IEEE standard:
On 14/10/17 11:43, oldk1331 wrote:
go beyond that and specify axioms seems even more impossible.
"Specify axioms"? Do you mean theorem prover? Like Coq or Isabelle?
Well the human-readable way to Specify axioms in category theory is
diagrams that commute but I suspect the computer-readable
oldk1331 wrote:
>
> https://github.com/oldk1331/fricas/commit/3eb98030494c8f84cd87b451a3a713732f777e06.patch
>
> All tests passed: https://travis-ci.org/oldk1331/fricas/builds/287915875
> (PS: it didn't pass on travis with X11, but pass on
> my machine with X11; so I disabled X11 in travis)
>
>
On 13 October 2017 at 20:53, oldk1331 wrote:
>
> You said Boolean has 'Finite', and size()$Boolean is 2.
> So Boolean should have Canonical.
Canonical is not about the number of values in a domain, it is about
how equality is defined. Although Boolean has only two possible
https://github.com/oldk1331/fricas/commit/3eb98030494c8f84cd87b451a3a713732f777e06.patch
All tests passed: https://travis-ci.org/oldk1331/fricas/builds/287915875
(PS: it didn't pass on travis with X11, but pass on
my machine with X11; so I disabled X11 in travis)
'sign' is exported from
> go beyond that and specify axioms seems even more impossible.
"Specify axioms"? Do you mean theorem prover? Like Coq or Isabelle?
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"FriCAS - computer algebra system" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop
On 14/10/17 02:01, oldk1331 wrote:
On Sat, Oct 14, 2017 at 5:16 AM, Bill Page wrote:
I am sorry but I do not see how to view this as a natural
transformation in the sense of category theory or as the term is
applied in Haskell. Could you explain?
I mean it