newRPL - build 1255 released! [updated to 1299]
|
08-02-2018, 02:30 AM
(This post was last modified: 08-02-2018 08:50 PM by The Shadow.)
Post: #248
|
|||
|
|||
RE: newRPL - build 1089 released! [update:build 1089]
Claudio L. Wrote:I'm liking this idea. While it will break compatibility, I think it goes a long way to make the result more usable. I vastly prefer this solution, but didn't realize it was on the table. By all means, do this! EDIT: The reason why I strongly prefer it is that to actually USE the factorization for anything, you have to separate the multiplicities from the primes anyway. It's an extra loop (or extra caution on a single loop) in every single program that uses prime factors, and it shouldn't be necessary. I hadn't thought of your idea of being able to give the unit well, units. That's very cool. Quote:I think it would be cleaner to do the above. I can live with the latter, as long as 1 never shows up as a factor in anything but 1, -1, or 0. (I actually wouldn't have a problem error-trapping on empty lists, but I see your point.) Quote:zero would factor as: Bad idea. You're basically defining zero as positive. Better to do: 0 { 1 } { 1 } Yes, technically zero is not a unit... but it just makes more sense this way. Quote:So, we would leave the leading factor, then a list of factors (or perhaps we should change the signs and output the roots?) and then a list of multiplicities. Looks good. (x-an) is more traditional in the math community, because x-an=0 yields an rather than -an. If you decide to let FACTORS handle rational numbers (please do!) don't forget to let it also handle rational functions. Just allow for negative exponents on polynomial factors. |
|||
« Next Oldest | Next Newest »
|
User(s) browsing this thread: 3 Guest(s)