Can you think of a fact in the assumptions system (implemented or not) that would break if floats are rational?
Aaron Meurer On Thu, Mar 20, 2014 at 4:34 PM, Sergey B Kirpichev <[email protected]> wrote: > On Thu, Mar 20, 2014 at 04:15:25PM -0500, Aaron Meurer wrote: >> So it's basically always been that way. The motivation is probably >> that any float representation must be finite, and hence rational. > > But arithmetic operations on rational numbers obey very > different algebraic properties (e.g. it's a field). > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "sympy" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to [email protected]. > To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. > Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sympy. > To view this discussion on the web visit > https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/sympy/20140320213419.GA6998%40darkstar.order.hcn-strela.ru. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sympy" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sympy. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/sympy/CAKgW%3D6%2BdL44_G-05njyg1P2HnY%2Bq1Yg95p2xwxCH6jfKh9%2BA4A%40mail.gmail.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
