Ahhhhhhhh And suddenly all my confusion about Order over the years goes away. See, in computer science, we usually denote O(f(x)) as the order of f(x) at infinity (or something like that).
Aaron Meurer On Sep 2, 2010, at 3:11 PM, Ronan Lamy wrote: > Le jeudi 02 septembre 2010 à 14:58 -0600, Aaron S. Meurer a écrit : >> Here is what I get in master: >> >> In [2]: O(x) + O(exp(1/x)) >> Out[3]: O(exp(1/x)) >> >> In [4]: O(exp(1/x)) + O(x) >> Out[4]: O(exp(1/x)) >> >> Can someone explain to me why O(x + exp(1/x)) = O(exp(1/x))? It seems to me >> that it should be O(x), since exp(1/x) is a decreasing function, so it >> should be O(1) (see plots at http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=exp(1/x)). > >> From the docstring for Order: "Represents O(f(x)) at the point x = 0." > > exp(1/x) goes to infinity for x -> 0, so the result is correct. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sympy" 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/sympy?hl=en.
