oldk1331 wrote:
>
> I discovered this bug while I am digging another one:
>
> Martin's orignal integral: integrate((a + b*x)/((3 + x^2)*(1 - x^2)^(1/3)), x)
> fails. However integrate(1/((3 + x^2)*(1 - x^2)^(1/3)), x) succeeds
> while integrate(a/((3 + x^2)*(1 - x^2)^(1/3)), x) fails:
>
> (1)
>
> The document says:
>random : % -> %
> ++ random(n) creates a random element from 0 to \spad{n-1}.
>
> That is good if n is positive. What if n is negative?
When n is 0 or negative then segment 0..(n - 1) is empty, so
call is incorrect.
> (2) -> random(-5)
>
>>> System erro
>
> > 1) The default value for nn is incorrect, and nn is not
> > updated after being used in K2Z.
> >
> > Actually, I think argumentless 'random' is a good idea.
>
> I misunderstood a little, my point is:
> 1) The default value of nn should not be 1.
> 2) We should use "1+random(nn)" in this cas
> Current definition means that for positive n you get exactly n
> values, each with probablility 1/n. Your proposed change would
> break this nice relationship. For people who can not read
> between lines we could add phrase: 'Error if n <= 0.'.
Then the signature for random will be awkward: PI
> AFAICS code using FSRED has design problem: due to random
> choice we may reduce denominator to 0. I believe that
> in such case we should restart computations using different
> reduction. But current code just signals error (which is
> definitely wrong).
Yes, that should be the correct soluti
Use Functor category to abstract the 'map' function,
to reduce the number of ')display op map', what do
you think?
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"FriCAS - computer algebra system" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from
On 16 October 2016 at 22:12, oldk1331 wrote:
> Use Functor category to abstract the 'map' function,
> to reduce the number of ')display op map', what do
> you think?
>
+1
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"FriCAS - computer algebra system" group.
To u
Bill, you were in the previous Monad discussion thread,
what do you think of the Monad this time?
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"FriCAS - computer algebra system" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
oldk1331 wrote:
>
> Use Functor category to abstract the 'map' function,
> to reduce the number of ')display op map', what do
> you think?
We have more than 50 packages named '*Functions2' which
implement 'map' between two domains. In principle
they could use single signature from single categor
> We have more than 50 packages named '*Functions2' which
> implement 'map' between two domains.
I am not suggesting replace those packages that deals with
more than two domains. I'm talking about
map : (S->S, %) -> % , where % has a parameter S
There are about 15 map signatures like this.
>
10 matches
Mail list logo
