Ralf Hemmecke wrote:
> > Float is different because nobody really expect exact answers from
> > Float, and also because errors accumulate in complex way.
>
> I still wouldn't want Float to belong to Group. If some domains claim to
> fulfill the axioms the Group imposes, then they actually should. No
> exception.
>
Well, Float also asserts Approximate. I guess you can interpret
assertions in two ways:
1) mathematical domain modeled by Float is a Group, but Float
is an approximate model
2) Float itself is a group -- clearly false, should be replaced
by some theory of floating point numbers.
The first way is how normally humans reason about Float. Exact
theories of floating point numbers tend to be of limited use.
Now, for computer use we typically need to make things more
precise, so second way (exact theory) has some appeal.
But I am not sure if following second way we can make system
that is as useful as system made according to first principle
and more sound.
--
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.
