in any case, try to be equal as much as possible!
So I support Bill's suggestion and strongly recommend
machineSorted? to tell the user what is really going on.
Am Mittwoch, 16. September 2009 schrieb Bill Page:
I've been bugged a little lately by a minor issue of nomenclature.
Both FriCAS
On Wed, Sep 16, 2009 at 2:41 PM, Gabriel Dos Reis wrote:
Bill Page writes:
[...]
| The problem is that FriCAS and OpenAxiom have choosen different
| names for the machine ordering. In FriCAS it is called smaller?.
| smaller?(alpha,beta) evaluates to true if the value of alpha comes
|
Gaby,
On Wed, Sep 16, 2009 at 2:41 PM, you wrote:
...
This is just binary relation. It is an obscure binary relation, much
of which not related to the actual mathematics that OpenAxiom
wants to deal with. That is part of the reasons why it is not glorified
into a category of its own.
...
Bill Page bill.p...@newsynthesis.org writes:
| On Wed, Sep 16, 2009 at 2:41 PM, Gabriel Dos Reis wrote:
|
| Bill Page writes:
|
| [...]
|
| | The problem is that FriCAS and OpenAxiom have choosen different
| | names for the machine ordering. In FriCAS it is called smaller?.
| |
Bill Page bill.p...@newsynthesis.org writes:
| Come to think of it, shouldn't machine or implementation-dependent
| *equality* be handled the same way? It has always seemed rather
| confusing to me that '=' is used in Axiom for this. (Both FriCAS and
| OpenAxiom still do this.)
I'm afraid I
Bill Page bill.p...@newsynthesis.org writes:
| Gaby,
|
| On Wed, Sep 16, 2009 at 2:41 PM, you wrote:
| ...
| This is just binary relation. It is an obscure binary relation, much
| of which not related to the actual mathematics that OpenAxiom
| wants to deal with. That is part of the
On Wed, Sep 16, 2009 at 4:21 PM, Gabriel Dos Reis wrote:
Bill Page writes:
| I think it is good to cite an existing standard but I am not so sure
| how relevant it is in this context. Perhaps C++ is a little obscure
| for the average mathematically-oriented developer ... but no matter.
Bill Page wrote:
I've been bugged a little lately by a minor issue of nomenclature.
Both FriCAS and OpenAxiom have implemented a distinction between some
mathematical or natural ordering and equality of the members of a
domain - which might not always be defined or may be defined in
On Wed, Sep 16, 2009 at 6:20 PM, Waldek Hebisch wrote:
Concerning having the same name as OpenAxiom: AFAICS 'smaller?'
and 'before?' are different and have different names. I doubt
we gain much by making name the same.
Although the implementation is different as far as I can see the
Bill Page bill.p...@newsynthesis.org writes:
[...]
| It is an obscure binary relation, much of which not related to
| the actual mathematics that OpenAxiom wants to deal with.
| That is part of the reasons why it is not glorified into a category
| of its own.
|
| In OpenAxiom 'before?' is
Bill Page wrote:
Note: In FriCAS
not all domains in OrderedSet are Comparable.
Why do you think so? Definition of OrderedSet is supposed to
insure that each OrderedSet is Comparable.
--
Waldek Hebisch
hebi...@math.uni.wroc.pl
On Wed, Sep 16, 2009 at 10:09 PM, Waldek Hebisch wrote:
Bill Page wrote:
Note: In FriCAS
not all domains in OrderedSet are Comparable.
Why do you think so? Definition of OrderedSet is supposed to
insure that each OrderedSet is Comparable.
Sorry that was a typo. What I mean to write was:
12 matches
Mail list logo
