On 11/28/07, Waldek Hebisch wrote: > > Martin Rubey wrote: > > > > Dear all, especially Bill, > > > > I'd need members$BinaryTree right now, did you supply a patch or > > did you only notice? (I guess the patch is not difficult, but still...) > > > > I also did not notice a patch -- I assume that Bill just noticed the > problem. I would like to have this function in the next FriCAS > release and I would like to have release in few days so I will > write one unless somebody provides one earlier. >
No I did not supply a patch. I only noticed that 'members' is defined for BinaryTree but that it depends on another function 'parts' that is missing from domain. I think there is a problem defining exactly what one might mean by 'members$BinaryTree'. In particular: What ordering is to be assumed? For example if you do not mind an "in-order" traversal than maybe you would like this definition: members(t) == map(value,nodes t) Regards, Bill Page. ------------------------------------------------------------------------- SF.Net email is sponsored by: The Future of Linux Business White Paper from Novell. From the desktop to the data center, Linux is going mainstream. Let it simplify your IT future. http://altfarm.mediaplex.com/ad/ck/8857-50307-18918-4 _______________________________________________ open-axiom-devel mailing list open-axiom-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/open-axiom-devel
