Martin Rubey wrote:
> Do we really want to declare all integers less than 2 non-prime? Eg.,
> prime?(-5) gives false.
>
> Martin
>
> (Apart from this, I was a little surprised that we don't even have
> prime? for polynomials, etc.)
In UniqueFactorizationDomain we have:
prime?: % -> Boolean
++ prime?(x) tests if x can never be written as the product of two
++ non-units of the ring,
++ i.e., x is an irreducible element.
So the problem is that apropriate polynomial domains should have
UniqueFactorizationDomain.
And for consistency integers should use the same definition, that
is apply absolute value before proper primality test.
--
Waldek Hebisch
[email protected]
--
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 [email protected].
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
[email protected].
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/fricas-devel?hl=en.
