Hi Waldek, I must admit, I only have a vague idea of what problem you want to solve. Up to now I only guess that it has to do with having a unique order that is used, for example, for printing or in other places where an order of the elements is needed, the domain itself, however, does not provide a "<: (%, %) -> Boolean" like Expression(Integer).
If it is your intention to make *every* (or nearly every) domain export an such an order, I would make that intention explicit in the description of the category. Ralf On 05/15/2009 03:27 PM, Waldek Hebisch wrote: > Ralf Hemmecke wrote: >> Hi Waldek, >> >> +Comparable(): Category == SetCategory with >> + --operations >> + smaller?: (%,%) -> Boolean >> + ++ smaller?(x, y) is a strict total ordering on the elements of >> the set. >> >> Just out of curiosity... >> Is there any reason making Comparable inherit from SetCategory? >> I don't have a concrete problem yet, but I wonder why SetCategory is >> needed for what you have in mind. >> > > > 1) Order implies equality, so using existing categories we have > two possibilities: BasicType and SetCategory > > 2) Comparable is used as replacement for OrderedSet. Given that > OrderedSet inherited form SetCategory doing the same for > Comparable minimizes change. > > 3) If anybody wants to strigthen usage of basic categories like > BasicType or SetCategory, then I am for this. But I feel that > this would be "orthogonal" change. > > So, basically, I had enough work solving main problem... --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "FriCAS - computer algebra system" group. To post to this group, send email to fricas-devel@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to fricas-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/fricas-devel?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
